SUDIP BISWAS AMBU BINDU CHAKRAVORTY vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. — WPA/7163/2026

Case under West Bengal Correctional Services Act ,1992 Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 07th May 2026.

CNR: WBCHCA0139122026

CASE DISPOSED

Next Hearing

30th March 2026

Filing Number

WPA/7090/2026

Filing Date

20-03-2026

Registration No

WPA/7163/2026

Registration Date

23-03-2026

Judge

HON'BLE JUSTICE AMRITA SINHA

Coram

HON'BLE JUSTICE AMRITA SINHA

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )

Sub-Category

APPOINTMENT ( 4 )

Judicial Branch

MANDAMUS SECTION

Decision Date

07th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

West Bengal Correctional Services Act ,1992 Section NA

Petitioner(s)

SUDIP BISWAS AMBU BINDU CHAKRAVORTY

Respondent(s)

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE AMRITA SINHA

30-03-2026

NEW MOTION

04-05-2026

MOTION

06-04-2026

MOTION

02-04-2026

NEW MOTION

01-04-2026

NEW MOTION

Orders

07-05-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE AMRITA SINHA

Case Summary: WPA No. 7163/2026 The Calcutta High Court dismissed Sudip Biswas's petition seeking appointment as a Welfare Officer in jails on grounds of limitation. The petitioner had applied for a 2007 recruitment but approached the court only in March 2026—nearly 19 years later—claiming he was eligible but never called for interview. The court held the petition "hopelessly time barred," ruling that merely exchanging RTI communications with authorities does not extend the limitation period indefinitely, and the petitioner should have approached the court within reasonable time. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WPA No. 7163/2026 The Calcutta High Court dismissed Sudip Biswas's petition seeking appointment as a Welfare Officer in jails on grounds of limitation. The petitioner had applied for a 2007 recruitment but approached the court only in March 2026—nearly 19 years later—claiming he was eligible but never called for interview. The court held the petition "hopelessly time barred," ruling that merely exchanging RTI communications with authorities does not extend the limitation period indefinitely, and the petitioner should have approached the court within reasonable time. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case