Calcutta High Court
WPA/10299/2026 of JOYDEB KARMAKAR @ JAYDEB KARMAKAR Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. on 24 September 2026
Court No. 10 AGM In The High Court At Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side W.P.A 10299 of 2026 Joydeb Karmakar @ Jaydeb Karmakar -versus- The Union of India & Ors. Mr. Himangshu Kumar Ray. Mr. sushant Bagaria. Mr. Subhasis Podder. Ms. Shiwani Shaw. …For the
29.09.2026
Court No. 10
AGM
In The High Court At Calcutta
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
W.P.A 10299 of 2026
Joydeb Karmakar @ Jaydeb Karmakar
-versus-
The Union of India & Ors.
Mr. Himangshu Kumar Ray.
Mr. sushant Bagaria.
Mr. Subhasis Podder.
Ms. Shiwani Shaw.
…For the petitioner.
Mr. Uday Sankar Bhattacharya.
Mr. Kaustav Kanti Maiti.
… For the CGST Authority.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The matter has appeared in the list under the heading ‘To Be Mentioned’ for correction of certain typographical errors which are crept in the order dated 24th September, 2026 are accordingly corrected.
2. In the third line of sub-para i. of paragraph 9, ‘Respondent no. 3’ shall be read in place and stead of ‘respondent no. 1’. In the first line of sub-para ii. of the same paragraph ‘Respondent no. 3’ shall be read in place and stead of ‘respondent no. 1’. In the first line of sub-para iii. of the same paragraph ‘Respondent no. 3’ shall be read in place and stead of ‘respondent no. 1’. In the first line of sub-para iv. of the same paragraph ‘Respondent no. 3’ shall be read in place and stead of ‘respondent no. 1’. In the third and fifth line of sub- para v. of the same paragraph ‘Respondent no. 3’ shall be read in place and stead of ‘respondent no. 1’. In the fourth line of sub-para vi. Of the same paragraph ‘Respondent no. 3’ shall be read in place and stead of ‘respondent no. 1’. In the first line of sub-para vii. of the same paragraph ‘Respondent no. 3’ shall be read in place and stead of ‘respondent no. 1’.
3. The petitioner also submits that since there was a direction by this Court for filing a comprehensive detailed representation before the concerned respondent within a period of seven days from date but since the matter has appeared for correction, let the period be further extended from one week to two weeks from date.
4. The order dated 24th September, 2026 is corrected accordingly. The remaining part of the said order will remain unaltered.
5. Let this order be read along with the order dated 24th September, 2026.
6. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.
( Smita Das De, J.)