Suresh Bajaj vs State of West Bengal

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Cal) 629

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
PARTHA SARATHI SEN
Suresh Bajaj – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. N.C Bihani, Sr. Adv., Mr. Soumya Mukherjee, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Ayan Banerjee, Adv., Mr. Anujit Mookherji, Adv., Mr. A. Chowdhury, Adv.

Table of Content
1. background leading to the writ petition (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments regarding violation of lease clauses (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. respondent's counterarguments on legality of terms (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
4. legal interpretation and principles cited (Para 18 , 19)
5. court’s overview of law on vested rights (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)
6. key findings on lease agreements and their retrospective nature (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34)
7. court opinion on vested rights and retrospective legislation (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42)
8. conclusion on writ petition’s merit (Para 43 , 44)
9. final judgment and directives (Para 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51)

JUDGMENT :

PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.

1. By filing the instant writ petition, the writ petitioners have prayed for issuance of appropriate writ/writs against the respondents/authorities more specifically; against the respondent no.4/authority commanding him to revoke and/or rescind and/or cancel the order dated 23.06.2014 whereby and whereunder the said respondent no.4/authority declined to allow the writ petitioners’ representation for mutation in respect of plot