Goutam Roy Chowdhury vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 377 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Goutam Roy Chowdhury vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 1 February, 2024

                                                                              OD-1

                             WPO/226/2016
                    IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                      Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
                             ORIGINAL SIDE

                       GOUTAM ROY CHOWDHURY
                               VERSUS
                   THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

BEFORE
The Hon'ble Justice RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY
Date: 1ST FEBRUARY, 2024


                                                                   APPEARANCE
                                                      Mr. Debdutta Basu, Advocate
                                                                 ....for the petitioner
                                            Mr. Deepnath Roy Chowdhury, Advocate
                                                                     ...for the State
                                                    Ms. Deblina Chattaraj, Advocate
                                                        Mr. Angana Dutta, Advocate
                                                   ...for the respondent-Corporation

The Court: Mr. Roy Chowdhury, learned Advocate representing

the State-respondent has made a prayer for extension of time to file the

affidavit-in-opposition and claims that the same has been affirmed today.

This matter has been filed in the year 2016. Despite the order

directing exchange of affidavits dated 15th March, 2016 passed by a

Coordinate Bench of this Court, no affidavit-in-opposition had been filed by

the State-respondent though, the West Bengal Transport Corporation had

duly filed its affidavit in opposition. In fact, on several previous occasions,

the State-respondent never appeared and the matter had to be adjourned

for accommodating the State respondent. When the matter was taken for

final hearing, initially Mr. Naba Kumar Das and later Mr. Roy Chowdhury,

learned Advocate led by Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, Junior Standing

Counsel for the State had appeared in this matter on behalf of the State

respondent. The parties have already almost completed their arguments. In

fact despite liberty being afforded to the State-respondent to produce the

records by order dated 2nd May, 2023, no records were produced till the last

date of hearing, save and except the Memo no. 8567(150) dated 22nd

August, 2002.

Having regard to the aforesaid and since, arguments are on the

verge of completion, I am of the view that the State-respondent at this stage

cannot be permitted to file any affidavit-in-opposition. However, this Court

had once again by its order dated 24th January, 2024 permitted the State-

respondent to rely on the records and pursuant to leave granted by this

Court, records of this case have been produced. Let the same be retained in

the file. Written note of arguments filed on behalf of the State-respondent is

also taken on record.

Hearing concluded.

Judgment is reserved.

(RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY, J.)

akg/