Sk. Sajed Rahaman v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

10.12.2025 Court No.25 D/L No.24 S. Gayen

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA 25870 of 2025 Sk. Sajed Rahaman

Versus

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Anindya Lahiri, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Anish Chakraborty ...for the Petitioner Mr. Chandi Charan De, Ld. AGP Mr. Anirban Sarkar ...for the State

1. The claim of the petitioner in the present writ application is that on 17th November, 2022, the Executive Officer, Polba-Dadpur Panchayat Samity has issued a tender notice for maintenance of Mayur Mahal Picnic Garden at Rajhat, Hooghly. As per the tender notice, the prayer of lease should be for a period of 60 months, i.e., for five years. As per the tender notice, the petitioner has participated in the said tender and the petitioner has been declared as the successful bidder and the lease of maintenance of Mayur Mahal Picnic Garden at Rajhat, Hooghly was handed over to the petitioner.

2. The petitioner submits that as per the tender notice, the lease was for 60 months, i.e., five years but it was given only till 11th December, 2025, i.e., for a period of three years. The period of lease is going to be

completed on 11th December, 2025. He submits that he has made a representation to the authority, i.e., Executive Officer, Polba-Dadpur Panchayat Samity on 9th July, 2025 for consideration of the case of the petitioner for extension of lease period for further period of two years but till date the representation has not been considered and time of lease is going to be expired on 11th December, 2025.

3. None appears on behalf of the Executive Officer in spite of service of notice.

4. Learned counsel for the State submits that he is nothing to do as it is the case of the Panchayat Samity and he has nothing to say.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the materials on record. This Court finds that the tender was published for maintenance of Mayur Mahal Picnic Garden at Rajhat, Hooghly for a period of 60 months, i.e., for five years but the same was given only for a period of three years, i.e., up to 11th December, 2025. The petitioner has already made a representation to the authority for consideration of extension of the lease period for a further period of two years but the same is pending before the respondent No.3.

6. Accordingly, the writ petitioner is disposed of by directing the Executive Officer, Polba-Dadpur

Panchayat Samity to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 9th July, 2025 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and if the authorities find that the petitioner is entitled to get extension of the lease period, the same be extended and if the authorities find that the petitioner is not entitled to get extension, the authority shall pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two weeks thereafter. Till the decision is taken, the authorities are restrained from taking any action from taking possession of the premises in question from the petitioner and the petitioner shall be allowed to continue with the lease till the disposal of the representation of the petitioner by the respondent No.3.

7. WPA 25870 of 2025 is disposed of.

8. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

9. Urgent Photostat certified copy, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with all formalities. (Krishna Rao, J.)