Ananda Marga Pracara Samgha & ANR v. State Of West Bengal & ORS

01.04.2026 Item No.7 Ct. No.1 KS F.M.A. 1894 of 2016 With I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2016 (Old No. CAN 1606 of 2016) Ananda Marga Pracaraka Samgha represented by its General Secretary & Anr.

Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. P. Chaturvedi Mr. A. Mookherji Mr. V. Chaturvedi Mr. Prithish Chandra ..... For the Appellants Mrs. Manju Agarwal, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Anju Manot Mrs. Ruchi Hallen Ms. A. Pandey .....For the Respondents DICTATED BY SUJOY PAUL, CJ.:

1. Parties are represented through their respective learned counsel.

2. With the consent, matter is finally heard.

3. The subject-matter of challenge in this intraCourt appeal is the order dated 23.12.2015 passed in A.S.T. 294 of 2015 by learned Single Judge. The parties were at loggerheads before the learned Single Judge regarding Ananda Margi Dharma Mahasammelan, which was scheduled to be held in that year.

4. Learned counsel for appellants fairly submits that in these 10 years, when this appeal was pending, the appeal has lived its life but, at the same time, apprised us as to which body whether the appellants or the private respondent can organize that Mahasammelan, is an issue, which is pending consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He submits that subject to outcome of the matter pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, he may be given liberty to file appropriate application before the competent authority to organize such Mahasammelan and with this direction, matter may be disposed of.

5. The prayer is vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the private respondent by contending that although, the matter is pending consideration, as projected before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, fact remains that after 2015, various Mahasammelans have been organized and petitioners unsuccessfully challenged by filing several petitions every year before this Court. Thus, no liberty be given to the

petitioners/appellants. No other point is pressed by learned counsel for the parties.

6. As rightly and fairly pointed out by learned counsel for the appellants, this appeal is of 2016 has lived its life.

7. Thus, we are inclined to dispose of this appeal by reserving liberty to the parties to file appropriate application before competent authority depending upon the outcome of the matter pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, seeking permission to organize 'Mahasammelan'.

8. With the aforesaid observation and without expressing any opinion on merits, appeal stands disposed of.

9. With the disposal of this appeal, pending connected application also stands disposed of.

10. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties expeditiously upon compliance of all legal formalities.

(SUJOY PAUL, CJ.) (PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.)