Samuel Alex Gomes v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

22.06.2026 22.06.2026 Ct. No. 01 KCP WPA (P) 241 of 2026 (Samuel Alex Gomes Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.) Mr. Chirantan Sarkar Mr. Sultan A Mondal Mr. Subhrajyoti Datta .... For the Petitioner Mr. Ajit Kumar Mishra, Ld. A.G.P.

Mr. Gopal Krishna Sarkar Mr. Madhu Jana Ms. Puja Sarkar .... For the State Mr. Arjun Ray Mukherjee Mr. J. Medhi ..... For the respondent No.2 Mr. Saptansu Basu, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Riya Ghosh ..... For the respondent No.8 1.

Affidavit-of-service, as filed, be kept on record. 2.

Mr. Sarkar, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the Sabyaschi Calcutta LLP being the respondent no.8 herein situated at Regent SME Industrial Park under the jurisdiction of Begri, Domjur, District Howrah is running a cloth dyer factory/unit and is involved in use of dangerous chemicals. The said chemicals are hazardous to human life as well as the eco system and are creating air pollution. The said unit has no scientific waste management system and is disposing of waste in local drainage system.

3.

Detailing such illegalities, the petitioner submitted a representation to the West Bengal Pollution Control Board and the other

authorities on 17th April, 2026. In spite of receipt of the said representation, no steps have been taken and as such, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court.

4.

Mr. Basu, learned senior advocate enters appearance on behalf of the respondent no.8 and submits that on the basis of the complaint lodged by the petitioner, the said respondent has already been directed to appear before the hearing officer of the Public Grievance Cell of State Board on 15th July, 2026.

5.

Mr. Jana, learned advocate enters appearance on behalf of the State respondents.

6.

Mr. Arjun Ray Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing for the Board has placed before us a notice dated 15th June, 2026 issued to the respondent no.8. Let the said notice, as produced, be kept on record. A copy of the same has also been handed over to Mr. Sarkar in Court today. 7.

Answering our query, Mr. Mukherjee submits that the Public Grievance Cell of State Board would grant an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the respondent no.8 and take appropriate steps, in accordance with law.

8.

In view of such submissions, no further interference is called for in the present writ petition and the same is, accordingly, disposed of. 9.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs. 10.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties, upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, A.C.J.)