Safi Uddin Molla v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

D/L.09.

December 19, 2024.

KAUSHIK WPA No. 28858 of 2023 Safi Uddin Molla Vs.

The State of West Bengal and Others Mr. Saumen Gayen Mr. Sandipan Maity ... for the petitioner.

Mr. Lalit Mohan Mahata Mr. Ziaul Hoque ... for the State.

The petitioner alleges to be an employee under the Netaji Gram Panchayat since 2017.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that despite working for a considerable period of time, the petitioner has not been given any permanent employment. In an earlier round of litigation in WPA 13946 of 2021, the petitioner had been granted liberty to make a representation before the concerned Gram Panchayat.

It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that despite having filed such representation, the Pradhan being the respondent no. 10 has neither considered nor disposed of such representation.

On behalf of the State respondents, it is submitted that the petitioner is not an employee

of the concerned Gram Panchayat and the Pradhan has no jurisdiction to engage the petitioner as an employee.

In such circumstances, the entire claim of the petitioner is misconceived and speculative. However, the State has no objection if the respondent no. 10 is directed to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated September 19, 2022 in accordance with law.

In view of the above, WPA 28858 of 2023 is disposed of by directing the respondent no. 10 to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated September 19, 2022 within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order to the said respondent and after giving a right of hearing to all the affected parties including the petitioner, in accordance with law and without being influenced by any observation made in this order.

It is made clear that there has been no adjudication on the merits of the case and all questions are left open to be decided by the respondent no. 10.

Since no affidavits have been called for, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed to have not been admitted by the respondents.

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of necessary formalities. (Ravi Krishan Kapur, J.)