Tapan Kumar Mondal vs Basudeb Mondal & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 4148 Cal

83   12.7.2022
Sc   Ct. no.12
                                         MAT 981 OF 2022
                                                with
                                       I.A No. CAN 1 OF 2022
                                                --------------

Tapan Kumar Mondal Vs.

Basudeb Mondal & Ors.

Mr. Ranjit Kumar Jaiswal Mr. Nandalal Pradhan.

... For the Appellant Mr. Arup Banerjee Mr. Arun Kr. Saha.

... For the Respondent No. 1.

Heard Mr. Ranjit Kumar Jaiswal, learned counsel

for the appellant and Mr. Arup Banerjee, learned

counsel for the respondent no.1.

The judgment dated 13th May, 2022 passed by the

Hon'ble Single Judge in WPA 28971 of 2008 has been

challenged in the present appeal.

In course of hearing when we perused the

impugned judgment, it is found that the present

respondent no.1 is the son of the deceased original M.R.

Dealer and the present appellant who was the

respondent no.9 in the writ petition, is the grandson of

the deceased original M. R. Dealer.

We do not want to go deep into the merit of the

case inasmuch as the present appellant had challenged

the order dated 9th February, 2013 passed by the Sub-

Divisional Controller rejecting the prayer for his

appointment as an M. R. Dealer in the place of his

deceased grandfather on compassionate ground. The

said writ petition was dismissed on 6th November, 2013

rejecting the claim of the present appellant. Against

that order no appeal was preferred and the order passed

in the aforesaid writ petition attained finality.

The present respondent no.1 preferred the instant

writ petition when his claim for appointment as an M. R.

Dealer in place of his deceased father was rejected on

the ground that the godown is not fit for storing of

foodgrains as it is a mud house. This question has been

elaborately discussed by the learned Single Judge.

The present appellant being the respondent no.9

before the writ court also took his stand for being

appointed as an M. R. Dealer on compassionate ground.

On consideration of submission advanced by

learned counsel for the parties and taking into

consideration the order dated 6th November, 2013

passed in W.P. 29470 (W) of 2013 the Hon'ble Single

Judge has rightly held that the respondent no.9 (present

appellant) has no surviving claim as the order passed in

the writ petition has attained finality.

Regard being had to the discussion of the Hon'ble

Single Judge in the impugned order and our observation

(supra), we do not find any merit in the appeal and the

same is accordingly dismissed but without costs.

Accordingly the connected application being I.A.

No. CAN 1 of 2022 also stands dismissed.

Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for,

be furnished expeditiously

(Chitta Ranjan Dash, J.)

(Aniruddha Roy, J.)