High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 08 CAL CK 2967

Mofizul Islam vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Calcutta High Court, Appellate Side · Decided on 5 August 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Smita Das De, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
WPA 10430 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 395 words
1.

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging inter alia, the inaction on the part of the State respondents in not considering and disposing of his application dated 10.11.2022 seeking grant of S. K. Oil Dealership license against the new / resultant vacancy at Village Suki, Block Nabagram, District Murshidabad.

2.

It is submitted that the petitioner is a licensed Fair Price Shop dealer under the Public Distribution System. He fulfils all eligibility criteria and possesses the required infrastructure.

3.

Pursuant to his application dated 10.11.2022 as submitted before respondent No. 5 along with all documents and fees, respondent No. 5 by a letter dated 20.01.2023 directed the Area Inspector to conduct an inquiry and submit a report. However, till date no Enquiry Report has been submitted and no decision has been taken in respect of the said application.

4.

Due to the continued inaction, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation on 26.11.2025 which is still lying pending.

5.

The Learned Counsel appearing for the state submits that the State has no objection if the representation of the petitioner is considered and disposed of by the competent authority.

6.

Having heard the parties and upon considering the materials available on record this Court finds that a prima facie case has made out by the petitioner warranting interference at this stage. The prolonged inaction of the authorities cannot be permitted to continue.

7.

Accordingly this Court disposes of the Writ Petition with the following directions:

a)

The petitioner shall file a comprehensive and detailed representation before respondent No. 4 within two weeks from the date of this order.

b)

Upon receipt of such representation, the respondent No. 4 shall consider the same dispose of it by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter, upon affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other stakeholders if any. Such decision shall be communicated to all the concerned parties within a week thereafter.

c)

The decision shall be taken independently and on its own merits, without being influenced by any observations.

d)

No further adjournment shall be granted to the petitioner.

8.

With this direction and observation the Writ Petition stands disposed of without going into the merits of the case.

9.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.