Calcutta High Court

WPA/26461/2026 of SANJIB DAS Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 25 September 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

17 sdas WPA 26461 of 2026 Sanjib Das Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Sourav Bhattacharjee ….. for the petitioner Mr. Piyush Chaturvedi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Tarun Kumar Jana ….. for the State 1. Let affidavit- of -service, as filed in Court, be kept on record. 2. Let

25.09.2026

sdas

WPA 26461 of 2026

Sanjib Das

Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Sourav Bhattacharjee

….. for the petitioner

Mr. Piyush Chaturvedi, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Tarun Kumar Jana

….. for the State

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

1. Let affidavit-of-service, as filed in Court, be kept on record.

2. Let affidavit of undertaking on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.

3. The petitioner is aggrieved that his representation of July 9, 2025, has not been considered at all.

4. The petitioner was a casual employee discharging his service as a driver. He had not been allotted any duty, on account whereof, he had approached the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal by way of O.A. No.104 of 2025. Learned Tribunal disposed of the matter directing the petitioner to make a representation and the authorities to consider such representation within a stipulated time.

5. Pursuant to the aforestated order, the petitioner made the representation of July 9, 2025, which has been pending since then. The petitioner, thereafter, proceeded to execute the order of the learned

Tribunal by way of a contempt petition, being CCP No. 33 of 2025.

6. The petitioner has filed an undertaking that he will withdraw such contempt petition upon orders being passed in this writ petition. Such affidavit of undertaking is kept on record.

7. Mr. Chaturvedi, learned senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent authorities, submits, in his usual fairness, that the representation has not been considered and will be done if the time extended.

8. In view thereof, the authorities are permitted to take a decision on the representation of July 9, 2025 by October 12, 2026.

9. With the aforestated direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

10. There will be no order as to costs.

11. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon usual undertakings. (Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.)

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead