Sunanda Das v. State Of West Bengal & ORS.
Ct. 10 Item Nos.22 18.09.2020 (suvendu) WPA 6822 OF 2020 (W.P. 6822 (W) OF 2020) Sunanda Das Vs.
State of West Bengal & Ors.
(Via Video Conference) Mr. Shuvro Prakash Lahiri .........for the petitioner Mr. Amal Kumar Sen Mr. Lal Mohan Bari Mr. Jaladhi Das ...........for the State Mr. Ayan Banerjee ..........for the SBSTC The petitioner says that she is interested to ply a vehicle as a franchises under South Bengal State Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'SBSTC), being the respondent no.2 in any of its routes. The petitioner says that she has made representation before the respondent no.3 but the same has remained undecided despite there being a specific scheme under the nomenclature Vision - 2025 been promulgated by the SBSTC.
On behalf of the SBSTC, respondent no. 2, and respondent nos. 3 and 4, being its officers, it is submitted that the license and or permission to ply vehicle in a particular route as a franchise is given
after floating a tender. The SBSTC has floated a tender but the petitioner did not participate in the same. The petitioner's case, therefore, cannot be considered in an isolated manner.
The petitioner wants the representation appearing at page 42 of the writ petition, being a letter addressed to the Respondent nos. 3 and 4, dated 19th March, 2020, to be considered.
No inconvenience will be caused to SBSTC in disposing of the said representation even if its objection is sustained.
The respondent no.3 is directed to dispose of the petitioner's representation by 30th November, 2020 giving the necessary reasons behind the decision arrived at on the basis of such representation. The respondent no.3 will be free to decide on the procedure and shall be required broad compliance of the principles of natural justice. He, however, if so decides can defy personal appearance of the writ petitioner in view of the present pandemic situation but will be required to consider all documents which forms part of the writ petition.
Since no affidavit-in-opposition is called for, allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed to be denied.
Nothing further remains to be adjudicated in this writ petition. The same is disposed of without any order as to costs.
(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)