TAPAS KUMAR MANNA BHASKAR ROY vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. — WPA/6640/2026

Case under Essential Commodities Act Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 06th May 2026.

CNR: WBCHCA0129442026

CASE DISPOSED

Next Hearing

25th March 2026

Filing Number

WPA/6575/2026

Filing Date

17-03-2026

Registration No

WPA/6640/2026

Registration Date

18-03-2026

Judge

HON'BLE JUSTICE SMITA DAS DE

Coram

HON'BLE JUSTICE SMITA DAS DE

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )

Sub-Category

Miscellaneous ( 8 )

Judicial Branch

MANDAMUS SECTION

Decision Date

06th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Acts & Sections

Essential Commodities Act Section NA

Petitioner(s)

TAPAS KUMAR MANNA BHASKAR ROY

Respondent(s)

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE SMITA DAS DE

25-03-2026

NEW MOTION

06-05-2026

NEW MOTION

04-05-2026

NEW MOTION

Orders

06-05-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE SMITA DAS DE

The court disposed of the writ petition without deciding its merits, directing respondent no. 4 (Food & Supply Department) to consider and dispose of the petitioner's pending representation dated 12.3.2026 within eight weeks, affording both parties a hearing, and to communicate the decision within one week thereafter. The court noted that the private respondent had already been selected for the fair price shop dealership license, but since the license had not yet been granted and the petitioner's representation remained pending, the authorities were permitted to conduct further inspections if necessary before making a final decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court disposed of the writ petition without deciding its merits, directing respondent no. 4 (Food & Supply Department) to consider and dispose of the petitioner's pending representation dated 12.3.2026 within eight weeks, affording both parties a hearing, and to communicate the decision within one week thereafter. The court noted that the private respondent had already been selected for the fair price shop dealership license, but since the license had not yet been granted and the petitioner's representation remained pending, the authorities were permitted to conduct further inspections if necessary before making a final decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case