Calcutta High Court
WPA/25698/2026 of KINKAR MANNA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 22 September 2026
28 sdas WPA 25698 of 2026 Kinkar Manna Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Tarun Kumar Das Mr. Dilip Kumar Shyamal ….. for the petitioner Mr. D. N. Ray, learned G.P. Mr. Indradeep Pal Ms. Atreya Chakraborty Mr. Saugata Pal Das ….. for the State 1. Let affidavit- of
22.09.2026
sdas
WPA 25698 of 2026
Kinkar Manna
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Tarun Kumar Das
Mr. Dilip Kumar Shyamal
….. for the petitioner
Mr. D. N. Ray, learned G.P.
Mr. Indradeep Pal
Ms. Atreya Chakraborty
Mr. Saugata Pal Das
….. for the State
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. Let affidavit-of-service, as filed in Court, be kept on record.
2. The petitioner is the son of a former employee who worked as a Roller Driver under the administrative control of the respondent authorities.
3. The petitioner’s father died-in-harness sometime in 2007, whereupon the petitioner made an application for compassionate appointment. Since the application had not been considered, the petitioner had approached the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal. The said application was disposed of by an order dated July 4, 2019. Since no decision was taken in terms of the said order, the petitioner has filed a second application before the learned Tribunal, being O.A. No. 347 of 2022, which is pending consideration. The present writ petition is based on certain subsequent facts, especially the letter dated August 8, 2025, issued by the respondent no. 4 to the respondent no. 2.
4. This writ petition is, thus, based on this subsequent fact and both Mr. Das, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Pal, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent authorities, are ad idem that if the respondent no. 2 is directed to act in terms of the aforestated letter dated August 8, 2025 and take a decision regarding the compassionate appointment of the petitioner, the cause would be sub-served.
5. In view of this consensus, I direct the respondent no. 2 to take a decision in this matter by November 15, 2026.
6. The resultant order will be communicated to the petitioner within a week thereafter.
7. If the respondent authorities find that the petitioner is indeed eligible, consequential steps for his appointment will be taken as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three weeks thereafter.
8. With the aforestated directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
9. There will be no order as to costs.
10. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon usual undertakings. (Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.)