- (1.) In Re: CAN 11950 of 2017 This application seeking leave to appeal has been preferred by one Nanda Kumar Mishra. It is his specific contention before this Court that WP 29000 (W) of 2017 (Sk. Md. Anisur Rahman v. State of West Bengal and Ors.) was moved before a learned Single Judge wherein there was a prayer restraining the concerned respondents from interfering with the administration of Panskura Municipality and functioning of the writ petitioner as Chairman of the said municipality. According to the applicant, on 13th December, 2017, he came to know from the news channels that the writ petitioner/respondent had been victorious in some litigation before the High Court whereby the writ petitioner/respondent's position as the Chairman, Panskura Municipality, had been restored. The applicant-who is a Councillor of the said municipality - thereafter started calling up all the Councillors one by one and finally Saidul Islam Khan, one of the Councillors, informed him about the said writ petition. Consequently, the applicant got touch with the Advocate-on-Record of Saidul Islam Khan and obtained a copy of the writ petition and also applied for a certified copy of the judgement and order dated 13th December, 2017, passed by the learned Single Judge. The applicant has stated specifically that he was not a party to the writ proceeding and had no idea of the orders passed therein until the date of affirming the instant application.
(2.) A bare perusal of the records of the First Court reveals that Sk. Md. Anisur Rahaman had filed a writ petition, being WP 29000 (W) of 2017 on 27th November, 2017, wherein there were fifteen respondents. These respondents include, Nabakumar Bhattacharjee, who has been described as the Vice-Chairman of the Panskura Municipality; Sk, Samiruddin, described as the Councillor and President of P.W.D. Standing Committee, Panskura Municipality; Debabrata Acharya, being the Councillor and Water Standing Committee, Panskura Municipality; Sk. Md. Asiqur Rahaman, being described as the Councillor of Panskura Municipality. That apart, we notice the name of Saidul Islam Khan as the respondent no. 6, being described as an elected member from Constituency (Ward) No. 9, Panskura Municipality.
(3.) During the course of hearing we are informed by the learned Advocate General that Panskura Municipality comprises of a total eighteen (18) Councillors. We do not find from the cause-title of the writ petition that all the Councillors have been made parties to the writ proceeding. We also do not find Panskura Municipality has been made a party to the writ proceeding. Rather, we find that the Executive Officer, Panskura Municipality, has been made a party to the writ proceeding, as respondent no. 5. There cannot be any manner of doubt whatsoever that in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, the judgement and order dated 13th December, 2017, passed by the learned Single Judge in Sk. Md. Anisur Rahaman's writ petition vitally affects the rights of the applicant, namely, Nanda Kumar Mishra, since by virtue of the said order, his election as the Chairman of Panskura Municipality in a meeting of Board of Councillors held on 1st December, 2017, stands virtually nullified. It is evident that the writ petitioner, Sk. Md. Anisur Rahaman, has not made all the Councillors as party to the writ proceeding and has chosen to make only a few of them as parties. It is also evident that Panskura Municipality, being a body corporate, is an artificial juristic person/entity but was not even made a party to the writ proceeding, although its Executive Officer has been made a party respondent no. 5.;