Shyama Pada Nayek v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

jdt.

30.08.2023 jb.

W.P.A. 8438 of 2022 (Shyamapada Nayek vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) Mr. Kamal Krishna Chakraborti .... For the Petitioner Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.

None appears for the respondents despite service. Mr. Chandi Charan De who is present in Court and usually appears for the State is requested to represent the State in this matter along with a junior of his choice. The appointment of Mr. De, learned advocate and Mr.

Anirban Sarkar, learned advocate be regularised by the office of the learned Legal Remembrancer. Copy of the writ petition along with annexure thereto be served upon Mr. De in course of the day.

The petitioner seeks a direction upon the 3rd respondent to consider the representation submitted by him on 27th January, 2016 for renewal of his mining lease in compliance with the order passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court on December 14, 2015 in W.P. 29389(W) of 2015.

Learned counsel for the State respondents submits that the 3rd respondent be directed to consider the representation in accordance with law.

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider and dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 27th January, 2016 within one month from the date of communication of this order upon affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders including the petitioner in the light of the observation made by this Court in the order dated December 14, 2015 in W.P. 29389(W) of 2015.

The decision taken by the authority shall be communicated to the petitioner within a week thereof. There shall be no order as to costs.

Since no affidavit has been invited, allegations contained in the writ petition shall be deemed not to have been admitted.

Urgent certified website copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of requisite formalities.

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)