Calcutta High Court
MAT/1592/2026 of MORTUJA SK Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 23 September 2026
Court. No. 12 GB MAT 1592 of 2026 With CAN 1 of 2026 With CAN 2 of 2026 Mortuja Sk. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Shounak Bhattacharya, Mr. Kignsuk Mondal, Mr. T. Ghosh, Mr. Suman Das … for the Appellant. Mr. Tapas Kumar Chatterjee, Ms. Tapasi Palit Sinha, Mr.
Item No.12
23.09.2026
Court. No. 12
GB
MAT 1592 of 2026
With
CAN 1 of 2026
With
CAN 2 of 2026
Mortuja Sk.
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Shounak Bhattacharya,
Mr. Kignsuk Mondal,
Mr. T. Ghosh,
Mr. Suman Das
… for the Appellant.
Mr. Tapas Kumar Chatterjee,
Ms. Tapasi Palit Sinha,
Mr. Monojit Chakrabarty
… for the State.
Mr. Robiul Islam,
Mr. Sk. Jayed Hossain,
Mr. Masooq Rahman,
Ms. Sumitra DAs
… for the Respondent No.5.
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. CAN 1 of 2026 is an application for leave to appeal from the order dated September 15, 2026. By the order impugned the learned Judge directed the prescribed authority, Raghunathganj – II Block to convene the meeting for election of the new pradhan within 10 days from the order of Her Lordship.
2. The appellant is the pradhan who was removed by majority at the meeting held under the direction of the Court. The validity of the meeting was never challenged and, as such, Mr. Bhattacharya’s submissions that the result of the meeting was contrary to law, is no longer relevant.
3. In any event, the issue before us is whether the meeting scheduled to be held for election of the new pradhan can be allowed to be held.
4. The appellant only has a right of voting in the said meeting. He is already removed. Even if, the meeting is not held, it does not enure to his benefit.
5. We do not accept Mr. Bhattachary’s contention that under Section 12 (10) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973, the meeting for the election of new pradhan also has to be held within 30 days from the date of receipt of requisition. All the steps envisaged between Sections 12(4) to 12(9) have to be completed within 30 days from the date of receipt of the motion by the prescribed authority. The West Bengal Panchayat (Constitution) Rules, 1975 under Chapter-5, Section 6 thereof, provides the mechanism for appointment of a new pradhan upon removal of the erstwhile pradhan. The date of the meeting has been fixed within 30 days from the date of removal of the pradhan.
6. Under such circumstances, we are not inclined to grant any leave to appeal. Accordingly, the application for leave is dismissed. All consequential proceedings before us are also dismissed.
7. The direction of the learned Single Judge upon the police shall be implemented and the meeting shall be held without fail.
8. Parties are directed to act on the basis of the server copy of this order.
(Shampa Sarkar, J.)
(Arjun Ray Mukherjee, J.)