SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 1530

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
RAKHI SAHA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. – Respondent
WPA 271 / 2026



Court No. 19 WPA 271 of 2026 (265719)

14.01.2026 Rakhi Saha (AD 12) Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

(S. Banerjee)

Ms. Pampa Dey (Dhabal)

Ms. Sangita Banerjee …for the petitioner Mr. Lalit Mohan Mahata, Ld. AGP Mr. Himadri Kumar Mahata …for the State Mr. Sanjay Saha Mr. Raju Mondal …for the respondent no. 7 Affidavit of service filed in Court today, is taken on record.

The petitioner has challenged the order of the Additional District Magistrate and District Land and Land Reforms Officer, Purba Bardhaman dated October 30, 2023 in this writ petition.

Mineral Development and Trading Corporation Limited (‘WBMDTCL’, for short), being the 7th respondent, raises an objection as to the maintainability of the instant writ petition in view of availability of an appellate remedy provided under Rule 51 of the West Bengal Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2016 (‘the 2016 Rules’, for short).

After some argument, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner prays for leave to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to approach the authority under Rule 51 of the 2016 Rules.

Though the writ petition has been filed on January 5, 2026, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that in the meantime the husband of the petitioner, who was the original lessee, passed away and for such reason there was some delay in approaching this Court.

Learned advocates representing the 7th respondent and the learned advocate appearing for the State-respondent do not oppose the prayer for condonation of delay.

In the light of the submission made by the writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the petitioner is permitted to prefer an appeal under Rule 51 of the 2016 Rules within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a server copy of this order.

In the event the appeal is presented within the aforesaid time limit, the same shall be considered on its merit without dismissing the same on the ground of limitation. The said appeal shall be disposed of by the appellate authority as expeditiously as possible but preferably within a period of 12 weeks from the date of filing of the appeal.

(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top