Rina Roy vs State Of West Bengal And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 101 Cal

Form No. J(2)

                IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                   Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
                           Appellate Side

Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Jay Sengupta.


                      W.P.A 27240 of 2022

                              Rina Roy
                                  Vs.
                   State of West Bengal and others.




For the Petitioners            : Mr. Debabrata Saha Roy
                                 Mr. Subhankar Das


For the State                   : Mr. Susovan Sengupta


For the respondent no. 6, 7 & 8 : Mr. Pingal Bhattacharyya

Heard on : 04.01.2023

Judgment on : 04.01.2023

The Court:

This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

praying for direction upon the respondents to grant dealership licence

in favour of the petitioner on compassionate ground under died-in-

harness category in place of her deceased husband at village & P.O.:

Dakshin Khayerbari, P. S. Dhupguri under Jalpaiguri Sadar Sub-

Division in the District of Jalpaiguri.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits

as follows. The father of the petitioner was appointed as Fair Price

Shop cum Kerosene Oil at village & P.O.: Dakshin Khayerbari, P. S.

Dhupguri under Jalpaiguri Sadar Sub- Division in the District of

Jalpaiguri. On 21.05.2013, the petitioner's father died. The mother of

the petitioner applied for the said dealership license on compassionate

ground on 08.04.2014. The mother passed away on 06.02.2020.

Immediately thereafter and within time, the petitioner herself made a

representation praying for dealership on compassionate ground on

24.02.2020. However, at that time, the petitioner's sisters did not

grant no objection certificate in her favour. The application remains

pending. Subsequently, the petitioner along with the proforma

respondents being the married sisters of the present petitioner made

an application applied for dealership on compassionate ground on

05.03.2020. However, an engagement letter of the deceased mother in

respect of her prior application was issued by the concerned

authorities on 15.07.2020. On 07.07.2022, the Deputy Director

(License), Dte. of DDP & S rejected the prayer made by the partnership

firm constituted by the petitioner and his sisters on the ground that

the married sisters were not dependents of the deceased father.

Thereafter, on 02.08.2022, the petitioner again made a representation

that he may be granted the license on compassionate ground. It is the

case of the petitioner that the petitioner had made an application in

time. Therefore, the question of non-applying for dealership on the

ground of compassionate appointment in time does not arise. The

petitioner is otherwise entitled to such dealership and the married

sisters are agreeable to issue 'no objection' certificate.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private respondents

submits that his client would issue respective no objection certificates

in case the petitioner is granted dealership in question on

compassionate ground.

Learned counsel for the State submits as follows. It is true that

the license was approved in favour of the mother of the petitioner after

her death. The petitioner again made an application for appointment

on compassionate ground. However, the same was not made in time.

The first application made by the petitioner immediately after the

death of his father had merged into the application made by the

petitioner and her sisters jointly and the latter was rejected

subsequently. Therefore, the subsequent application made by the

petitioner is beyond time.

I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels appearing

on behalf of the parties and have perused the writ petition.

It appears that the petitioner had earlier made an application for

appointment of compassionate ground after the demise of his father,

within time. However, the same was not accompanied with 'no

objection' from the other heirs. Besides, there is nothing on record to

show that such earlier application has ever been rejected.

It is a peculiar case where license was approved in favour of the

wife of the original dealer after a lapse of 7 years, that too after the

demise of the said applicant.

Be that as it may, after the joint application of the petitioner

and her sisters was rejected, another application was made for

appointment on compassionate ground by the petitioner. The same is

pending consideration. The private respondents appear to be willing to

give 'no objection' in respect of the same.

In view of the same and in the interest of justice, the respondent

no.3 is directed to consider the representations of the petitioner for

engagement as a dealer for appointment on compassionate ground

after granting an opportunity of hearing to the interested parties

including the petitioner, within a period of six weeks from the date of

communication of this order and to communicate the result of the

same to the petitioner within a fortnight thereafter.

Till the time the decision is taken and intimated to the

petitioner, no vacancy should be declared in respect of the dealership

in question.

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order may be delivered

to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for, upon

compliance of all formalities.

(Jay Sengupta,J.)

ssi