Hasina Bibi v. The Managing Committee Contai Rahamania High Madrasah H S And ORS

MAT 450 of 2025 Item23-06-2025 5.

CAN 1 of 2025 CAN 2 of 2025 sg Hasina Bibi Vs.

The Managing Committee, Contai Rahamania High Madrasah & Ors.

Ct. 8 Mr. Anindya Sundar Das Mr. Shaunak Ghosh Ms. Suva Gayen Ms. Paramita Monal Mr. Suman Halder Md. Suhoil ...for the appellant Mr. Soumen Kr. Datta Mr. Subham Datta Ms. Juthika Barman ...for the writ petitioner Mr. Nadeem Sulaiman ...for the Madrasha Board Mr. Shamim-ul-Bari Ms. Tuhina Parvin ...for the State In Re: CAN 2 of 2025 1.

This is an application for condonation of delay. There is a delay of 330 days in filing the memorandum of appeal. 2.

We are satisfied with the explanation offered for not being able to file the memorandum of appeal within the period of limitation and accordingly, we allow the application by condoning the delay of 330 days in presenting the memorandum of appeal.

3.

CAN 2 of 2025 is accordingly, disposed of.

In Re: MAT 450 of 2025 with CAN 1 of 2025 4.

The appeal is arising out of an order dated 21st June, 2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in a writ petition. The

petitioner claims to be a person aggrieved. He is the guardian. It is submitted that the proposed appellant is aggrieved by an order dated 21st June, 2024.

5.

Prima facie, it appears that the learned Single Judge has proceeded on the basis that, in view of the subsistence of an interim order dated 20th October, 2022 in WPA 23314 of 2022, the order of the Secretary, West Bengal Board of Madrasah Education as contained in Memo dated 11th June, 2024 was stayed. It further appears that the learned Single Judge has decided to hear the writ petition in which the impugned order is passed along with the writ petition, being WPA 23314 of 2022.

6.

On such consideration, prima facie, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

7.

The grievance raised in the proposed application if at all sustainable was continuing since 20th October, 2022. However, the petitioner may approach the learned Single Judge for intervention and in the event such application is filed, the learned Single Judge may decide the said application absolutely at his discretion. The locus of the applicant is not decided in this proceeding.

8.

On such consideration, the appeal and the application are disposed of with the aforesaid direction.

9.

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this judgment, if applied for, be submitted to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.

(Soumen Sen, J.) (Smita Das De, J.)