Rabindranath Das v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Ct.551 16.06.25 Item No.07 Sws.M WPA 8107 of 2025 Rabindra Nath Das vs.

State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Allen Felix ....for the petitioner Mr. Amal Kumar Sen, Ld. AGP Ms. Ashima Das (Sil) ...for the State Mr. Sanat Kumar Roy Mr. Baidurya Ghosal ...for the private respondent The petitioner has approached this Court by filing this writ petition alleging arbitrary action on the part of the Staterespondents and seeking issuance of the writ of mandamus commanding the respondent transport authority "not to renew the old time table (provisional) issued in favour of the private respondent vide Memo No. 868/MV/PBDN dated 08.04.2024".

Mr. Roy, learned advocate appearing for the private respondent submits that in terms of an order dated March 28, 2025 passed by this Court in WPA 6794 of 2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner's time table on the route from Bardhaman Alisha Bus Stand to Kamarpukur via Shyamsundar, Pahalanpur, Muthadanga, Arambagh (Express)But 2 up & 2 down in respect of permit No. P.St P. No. 07/22-23, has already been extended and a provisional

time table has been given to the private respondent on the aforesaid route for 30 days. In support of such contention he hands up a copy of Memo No. 880/MV/PBDN dated May 5, 2025. Such document is taken on record.

Mr. Roy further submits that in view of such subsequent development of the provisional time table having been granted to the petitioner during pendency of the writ petition the instant writ petition has lost life. Mr.

Felix, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner on the other hand submits that the petitioner had objected to such extension and had also objected to the private respondent violating the time table, taking cognizance whereof the respondent- State authorities have already started an enquiry. In support of his such contention he hands up a copy of Memo No.1180/MV/PBDN dated June 10, 2025. The said document is taken on record. Mr. Felix further submits that in view of the aforesaid, the authorities may be directed to take appropriate steps. Mr. Felix further submits that the provisional time table is dated May 5, 2025 and its validity is only for 30days and as such the same may not be valid today as the same has expired. Mr. Sen, learned advocate appearing for the Staterespondents submits that it is apparent from the submission made on behalf of the petitioner as well as the private respondent that the Regional Transport Authorities have been vigilant and have taken appropriate action.

Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and having considered the material on record this Court is of the view that no purpose would be served by keeping the writ petition pending. It appears that indeed the Regional Transport Authority have acted on the petitioner's representation as would be apparent from the Memo dated June 10, 2025 (copy whereof has been handed up to this Court of the by the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner).

In view of the above, WPA 8107 of 2025 is disposed of by leaving the Regional Transport Authority free to take appropriate decision in the matter strictly in accordance with law. The parties shall also be free to take such steps as may be available to them in law for redressal of their grievances, if any.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs. Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied as expeditiously as possible. (Om Narayan Rai , J.)