Calcutta High Court
MAT/84/2026 of SHRI.ANAND SINGH YADAV Vs THE ANDAMAN AND NICOBAR ADMINISTRATION AND ORS. on 24 August 2026
HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** MAT/84/2026 IA No.CAN/1/2026 Shri Anand Singh Yadav Vs. The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others Mr. KMB Jayapal … for the appellant Mr. V.D.Sivabalan … for the Administration Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar … for the
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ]
***
MAT/84/2026
IA No.CAN/1/2026
Shri Anand Singh Yadav
Vs.
The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others Mr. KMB Jayapal … for the appellant Mr. V.D.Sivabalan … for the Administration Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar … for the pvt. respondent August 24, 2026
[SR]
Item 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. The order dated 28th July, 2026 passed by the learned Single Judge is impugned in the instant appeal.
2. The primary ground of challenge in the appeal by the appellant is violation of principle of natural justice.
3. It appears that the learned Single Judge has come to a categorical finding that opportunity of hearing was provided to the appellant/writ petitioner. There was a proceeding recorded before the respondent authorities where the signature of the appellant/writ petitioner was obtained. The said page, where the signature was obtained, was, for reason best known, not annexed to the writ petition.
4. The Court came to a specific finding that there was deliberate and willful tampering of official records and suppression of material facts for misleading the Court.
5. The Hon’ble Single Judge took the pains and verified the records available with the Administration and came to the conclusive finding that opportunity of hearing was duly provided to the appellant/writ petitioner.
6. The Court was pleased to dismiss the writ petition with costs. The Court was also of the opinion that the provision for appeal under Section 32(4) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 is available to the appellant/writ petitioner.
7. Learned advocate representing the appellant insists that there has been violation of principle of natural justice.
8. Learned advocate representing the respondents opposes the submission of the appellant.
9. Upon hearing the submissions made on behalf of all the parties and on perusal of the materials placed before this Court, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. We are convinced that there is no prima facie, evidence, to support the submission of violation of principle of natural justice.
10. The appeal and the connected application, accordingly, fails and are hereby dismissed.
11. The costs, however, imposed is assessed at Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) payable by the appellant to the office of the Designated Officer (FS), South Andaman positively by 3rd September, 2026.
12. The matter is made returnable on 7th September, 2026 for ascertaining payment of costs.
13. All parties are directed to act on a server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
( Amrita Sinha, J. )
( Biswaroop Chowdhury, J.)