Susanta Ghosh v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.
WPA 4291 of 2026 Item- 15.
25-02-2026 Susanta Ghosh
Versus
State of West Bengal & Ors.
Ct. 19 sg Mr. Vivek Basu Mr. Riju Ghosh Mr. Sumitava Chakraborty Ms. Bratati Pramanick ...for the petitioner Md. Zakir Hossain ...for the State Affidavit of service filed in Court is taken on record. The petitioner alleges that the petitioner could not carry on extraction activities for the entire lease period due to Covid-19 pandemic. The petitioner claims to have submitted representation before various authorities praying for extension of period of the lease for mining of sand.
The learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that in spite of receipt of such representation, no decision on such representation has been communicated to the petitioner till date.
The learned Advocate appearing for the State submits that the petitioner has approached this Court after about five years from the date of expiry of the said lease. He further submits that Additional District Magistrate and District Land & Land Reforms Officer, Bankura, is the appropriate authority to consider the representation. Faced with such situation, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner prays for leave to add the Additional District Magistrate and District Land & Land Reforms Officer, Bankura, as party respondent in this writ
petition.
Leave is granted to the learned Advocate for the petitioner to implead Additional District Magistrate and District Land & Land Reforms Officer, Bankura and to amend the cause title of this writ petition, here and now. Since the State is represented by the learned Advocate, there is no necessity to serve the amended copy of the writ petition upon the added respondent.
However, the learned Advocate-on-Record for the petitioner shall be obliged to serve copy of the amended cause title of the writ petition upon the learned Advocate representing the State forthwith.
However, since the petitioner submitted a representation initially on 22nd May, 2020, which is appearing at page 62 of the writ petition, this Court directs the Additional District Magistrate and District Land & Land Reforms Officer, Bankura, being the added respondent, to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 22nd May, 2020, which is appearing at page 62 of the writ petition and to dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or his authorized representative and communicate the said reasoned order to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible but positively within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a server copy of this order along with a copy of the representation of the petitioner dated 22nd May, 2020. At the time of passing this order, the learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that liberty may be given
to the petitioner to submit a representation before the respondent authorities to allow the transportation of the already extracted sand.
In the event a representation to that effect is submitted before the competent authority, such authority shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.
(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)