Shyamaprasad Sinha v. The State Of West Bengal And ORS.
ASR 25.
Ct. no. 24.
14.1.2025 WPA 27641 of 2024 Shyamaprasad Sinha Vs.
State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Tarapada Das ....For the petitioner Ms. Sonal Sinha Ms. Ashmita Chakraborty .....For the State The instant writ petition was filed seeking specific direction upon the authority concerned to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 22nd August, 2024. The representation is placed as annexure H of the instant writ petition.
I perused the representation.
It appears that one DibaKar Singha was ration dealer at Brahmandiha.. within Raipur block II, District- Bankura, who expired on 5th December, 1983. After demise of said M.R dealer, a vacancy notification was published in the year 1984 for appointment of M.R. dealership.
It is the case of the petitioner that in pursuance of such notification amongst 18 legal heirs Parbati Singha @ Sinha (daughter- in-law of the deceased M.R. dealer), mother of the present petitioner, considered to
be the most eligible person for the vacancy. However, her candidature was not considered. So he approached before this court in writ petition no. C.R. 1543(W) of 1984.
A co-ordinate Bench of this court has issued a direction on 22nd August, 1984 to consider the representation of Parbati Singha @ Sinha which was not considered. Again the said Parbati Singha @ Sinha has approached this court in a writ petition being no. 27579 of 2007. A co-ordinate bench vide order dated 8.8.20008 has directed the authority to consider the representation of Parbati Singha @ Sinha in terms of a power under review authority.
It is the case of the petitioner that the mother of the writ petitioner namely Parbati Singha @ Sinha expired on November, 2023. After that the petitioner has filed the representation with the authority to consider the case of petitioner for compassionate appointment.
Ms. Sonal Sinha , learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State authority has raised strong objection against any of the direction of this court.
Having heard the Learned counsel for the parties and also considering the matter it appears to me that on the last occasion vide order dated 8th August, 2008, a co-ordinate bench of this court is directed the authority concerned to consider the representation of
the petitioner in terms of power of review as enunciated in the order itself. Since then either Parbati Singha @ Sinha or the present petitioner never approached the authority. Now the petitioner has approached the authority to consider his case for appointment of the said dealership.
The petitioner has not demonstrated any document to show his bona fide that why he was silent since the year 2008 till today.
Considering the same, it appears to me that the petitioner is not bona fide to approach this court. Under the above observation, I find nothing in merit, to consider the representation of the present petitioner at this belated stage.
In the circumstance, the Writ petitioner is disposed of.
[Subhendu Samanta, J]