GITESH DAS MAHAPATRA ANANYA NEOGI vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. — WP.ST/185/2025
Case under Administrative Tribunals Act Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 22nd May 2026.
CNR: WBCHCA0411042025
Next Hearing
04th September 2025
Filing Number
WP.ST/185/2025
Filing Date
27-08-2025
Registration No
WP.ST/185/2025
Registration Date
29-08-2025
Judge
HON'BLE JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD , HON'BLE JUSTICE PRASENJIT BISWAS
Coram
HON'BLE JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD , HON'BLE JUSTICE PRASENJIT BISWAS
Bench Type
Division Bench
Category
GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )
Sub-Category
Miscellaneous ( 16 )
Judicial Branch
MANDAMUS SECTION
Decision Date
22nd May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
GITESH DAS MAHAPATRA ANANYA NEOGI
Respondent(s)
STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD , HON'BLE JUSTICE PRASENJIT BISWAS
NEW MOTION
FOR ORDERS
FOR ORDERS
FOR ORDERS
FOR ORDERS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 04-09-2025 | NEW MOTION |
| 22-05-2026 | FOR ORDERS |
| 21-05-2026 | FOR ORDERS |
| 20-05-2026 | FOR ORDERS |
| 19-05-2026 | FOR ORDERS |
Orders
Case Summary: WP.ST/185/2025 Court Decision: The Calcutta High Court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the Tribunal's dismissal of the petitioner's challenge to a fresh charge memo dated 22.04.2022. The court held that the State authorities were not precluded from issuing a properly formatted charge memo after abandoning a defective one containing draft charges, since the petitioner had only challenged the procedural form (not the substance) of allegations in the earlier proceeding and no explicit liberty to proceed afresh was denied. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: WP.ST/185/2025 Court Decision: The Calcutta High Court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the Tribunal's dismissal of the petitioner's challenge to a fresh charge memo dated 22.04.2022. The court held that the State authorities were not precluded from issuing a properly formatted charge memo after abandoning a defective one containing draft charges, since the petitioner had only challenged the procedural form (not the substance) of allegations in the earlier proceeding and no explicit liberty to proceed afresh was denied. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts