WPA/26667/2026 of SOVAN MAJI Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 23 September 2026

1. The petitioner in the instant case challenges inter alia, the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in not considering the representation dated 20.08.2026 within the statutory period of 30 days from the date of submission of the application for compassionate appointment, which is dehors the statutory mandate.

2. The petitioner applied on 25.6.2026 for grant of Fair Price Shop licence on compassionate ground along with ‘No Objection Certificate’ from other legal heirs. Thereafter, a representation was made on 20.08.2026 before the respondent nos. 1 and 2. However, the same remains pending for consideration.

3. Apropos the facts of the case, are that the petitioner’s father was a FPS dealer holding licence under the West Bengal Targeted Public Distribution System (Maintenance and Control) Order 2013

(hereinafter referred to as the Control Order 2013, for the sake of brevity and convenience). The said licence was terminated and was challenged by him by way of a writ petition, being WPA 23311 of 2023.

4. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner’s father expired on 21st January, 2025 and the legal heirs including the petitioner were substituted as petitioners therein.

5. The petitioner’s mother applied on 21st April, 2025 for grant of the said licence on compassionate ground, under Clause 20(ii) of the control order 2013, which was not processed owing to pendency of the Court case, as informed by Sub divisional Controller, Food & Supplies (SCFS) by memo dated 24th April, 2025.

6. The petitioner’s mother filed an interlocutory application challenging the said memo dated 24th April, 2025 in the pending writ petition.

7. Hearing of the application was concluded on 6th May, 2026 and judgment was reserved. Petitioner’s mother expired on 8th May, 2026.

8. By judgment dated 20th May 2026, the said application was allowed by this Hon’ble Court and respondents were directed to consider the application of the petitioner’s mother and the main writ petition was dismissed as having become infructuous.

9. Learned Additional Government Pleader, Nikunj Berlia takes a fair and pragmatic stand and does not raise any objection with regard to consideration of the representation dated 20.8.2026.

10. It is fairly submitted by the state that since the vacancy arising out of termination of licence of the original FPS dealer has not yet been re-notified, the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment can be considered in accordance with law, subject to verification of eligibility, ‘No Objection Certificate’ of other legal heirs, and compliance with Control Order 2013

11. Having heard the parties and upon perusing the materials on record, this Court finds that a prima facie case has been made out by the petitioner warranting interference at this stage. To balance the equities and to secure the ends of justice, this Court is of the considered view that representation dated 20.08.2026 requires consideration for appointment of FPS dealer on compassionate ground, as the vacancy has not yet been re-notified and no third party right has been created.

12. This Court directs the respondent no. 2 to consider and dispose of the representation dated 20.08.2026 within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and other stakeholders, if any. The decision so taken shall be communicated within a week thereafter.

13. However, it is made clear that the respondent no. 2 shall consider the ‘No Objection Certificate’ furnished by the other legal heirs during the course of hearing, for arriving at a logical and conclusive finding on the issue involved herein. This court has not gone into the merits of the claim for compassionate appointment and all points are left open to be decided by the respondent no. 2 independently.

14. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of without going into the merits of the case.

15. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.

(Smita Das De, J.)