Calcutta High Court
WPA/37/2026 of UJJAL KUMAR SARKAR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS on 13 August 2026
A. Roy,J.
Form J(2)
Sl. No. 38
AB
High Court at Calcutta
In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
Present:
The Hon’ble Justice Aniruddha Roy
W.P.A. 37 of 2026
Shri Ujjal Kumar Sarkar
Vs.
State of West Bengal & Ors.
For the petitioner
:
Mr. Ajay Singhal
Ms. Heena Yasmin Shaikh
For the State
:
Mr. Kunaljit Bhattacharjee
Ms. Rajni Singh Dev
Heard on
:
August 13, 2026
Judgment on :
:
August 13, 2026
[ IN COURT ]
Aniruddha Roy,J.
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 petitioner claims that he had worked as a contractor and carried out certain electrical work for the State authority. The demand notice dated October 6, 2025 at page 22 to the writ petition shows he demanded a sum of Rs.35,13,724/-.
A. Roy,J.
2. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, a part payment for a sum of Rs.14,00,000/- has been released and paid to the petitioner. The petitioner now claims the balance Rs.21,00,000/-.
3. On January 13, 2026 a co-ordinate Bench had called for a report. Time to file report was subsequently extended repeatedly but till date no report has been filed by the State.
4. In view of the above, the following directions are made:
(a) The petitioner shall serve a copy of the writ petition along with a copy of today’s order upon the respondent no. 3 forthwith;
(b) The respondent no. 3 thereafter upon issuing a prior hearing notice of at least seven days to the petitioner and after granting him an opportunity of hearing shall dispose of the claim of the petitioner in the light of the claim made by the petitioner in the writ petition by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law;
(c) This exercise shall be carried out and completed by the respondent no. 3 positively within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order; (d) In the event, the reasoned order confirms that, amount is due and payable to the petitioner, the respondent no. 4 and/or any other appropriate State authority shall pay the same to
A. Roy,J.
the petitioner by crediting his bank account through electronic mode but positively within two weeks from the date of the said reasoned order to be passed; (e) It is needless to mention that, at the time of hearing all the relevant records shall be looked into by the parties; (f) If the amount is payable, a lump sum quantum of Rs.30,000/- shall be paid by way of interest on the principal amount.
5. It is made clear that, this order shall not create any right or equity in favour of the petitioner in the event nothing is due and payable to the petitioner.
6. Since no report has been filed and affidavit has been called for, the allegations made in this writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents.
7. With the above observations and directions this writ petition being WPA 37 of 2026 stands disposed of, without any order as to costs.
8. Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished expeditiously.
(Aniruddha Roy, J.)