Sk. Israil vs State Of West Bengal & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 7489 Cal

Item no. 07


               IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                APPELLATE SIDE

Present:
The Hon'ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam
              And
The Hon'ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya


                               FMA 399 of 2021
                                      with
                  IA No. CAN 1 of 2020 (Old No. CAN 2755 of 2020)

                                      Sk. Israil
                                          vs.
                             State of West Bengal & ors.


Appearance:
For the Appellants       :    Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha

For the Respondents      :    Mr. Amal Kumar Sen

Mrs. Ashima Das (Sil)

Heard on : 11.11.2022

Judgment on : 11.11.2022

T.S. Sivagnanam J.:

This intra-Court appeal is directed against the order dated

3rd December, 2019 passed by the learned Single Bench in WP 2990 (W)

of 2019. The said writ petition was filed by the appellant praying for

issuance of a writ of certiorari to set aside the resolution dated 31 st

August, 2014 which had come to the knowledge of the appellant

pursuant to a query made by the appellant under the provisions of Right

to Information Act, 2005 by reply dated 27.11.2018 given by the

Regional Transport Authority, Paschim Medinipur. The learned Single

Judge by the impugned order dismissed the writ petition on the ground

that the appellant cannot seek for a contract carriage autorickshaw

permit merely by seeking application of right of equal treatment under

Article 14 of the Constitution of India de horse the State policy which

holds the ground.

In our considered view, the learned Single Judge did not

travel thus far to consider as to whether the appellant would be entitled

to any relief. All that was required to be seen whether the concerned

authority had complied with order and direction issued by the learned

Single Bench of this Court in WP 8513 (W) of 2018 on 5 th July, 2018.

The said order reads as follows:

"The affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.

The petitioner claims to have applied a permit under Gati Dhara Scheme for self- employment to the Regional Transport Authority, Paschim Medinipur for plying auto rickshaw in the route Khalsuli to Al Habib Hotel (Kharagpur).

The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that the said application has not been disposed of by the authority. It appears that the said application was made on 28th August, 2016 and till date no communication has been made to the petitioner.

The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent authorities submits that the applications made under the said Scheme shall

be taken up in the next Board Meeting of the Regional Transport Authority and the application of the petitioner shall also be considered.

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Regional Transport Authority, Paschim Medinipur to take a decision on the said application in the ensuing Board Meeting, which should not be beyond two months from the date of communication of this order and shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the decision shall be communicated to the petitioner within one week therefrom.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs."

On a reading of the above order, it clearly shows that there

was specific direction to the Regional Transport Authority, Paschim

Medinipur to take a decision on the application of the appellant for

contract carriage autorickshaw permit in the board meeting, which was

to be held within two months from the date of communication of this

order. There was a further direction upon the authority to afford an

opportunity of hearing to the appellant/writ petitioner and the decision

taken should be communicated to him within one week thereafter.

From the material papers placed before this Court and also after hearing

the learned Counsel for the State we find that the Regional Transport

Authority, Paschim Medinipur has violated the order and direction

issued by the learned Single Bench of this Court on 5.7.2018 quoted

above. It is open to us to initiate suo motu contempt proceeding against

the State Authority, however, that will in no way grant any relief to the

appellant as the appellant is kept in the dark as to for what reasons the

application given by the appellant for contract carriage autorickshaw

permit was rejected. In fact, the Regional Transport Authority, Paschim

Medinipur did not even communicate the order to the appellant nor any

opportunity of personal hearing was afforded to him and the appellant

came to know that his application was rejected only after he filed an

application under Right to Information Act, 2005 and for which

information was supplied by communication dated 27.11.2018. In the

said information nothing has been stated as to on what ground the

application was rejected. Therefore, we are of the clear view that

rejection of the application by the Regional Transport Authority,

Paschim Medinipur is illegal and the same is liable to be set aside.

Accordingly, the decision taken to reject the application of

the appellant is quashed and the matter is remanded back to the

Regional Transport Authority, Paschim Medinipur to strictly follow the

order and direction dated 05.07.2018 passed in WP 8513 (W) of 2018

within four weeks from the date of receipt of the server copy of this

order.

Hence, the appeal stands allowed to the extent as indicated

hereinabove. Consequently, the connected application also stands

disposed of.

(T. S. Sivagnanam, J.)

(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)

RP/Amitava (AR. CT.)