01.09.2026 Court No.25 In the High Court at Calcutta D/L No.275 S. Gayen Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA 16784 of 2026 Md Muslehuddin & Ors. Versus The Union of India & Ors. Mr. Omar Faruk Gazi Mr. Pratikur Rahaman Ms. Bidisha Das … for the Petitioners Ms. Anamika Pandey …for the ECI Ms. Rashmi Bothra …for the Union of India 1. Though there are altogether seven petitioners have filed the present writ application but this Court finds that the petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 are the family members and the petitioner No.7 is not related to the petitioner Nos. 1 to 6. 2. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to pass any order in respect of petitioner No.7, namely, Isub Mahaldar but the petitioner No.7 is at liberty to take appropriate steps by filing separate application, if so advised. 3. As regards the petitioner Nos. 1 to 6, namely, Md. Muslehuddin, Nejamuddin Sekh, Selim Sekh, Sarifa Khatun, Aklima Bibi @ Aklima Khatun and Momena Bibi @ Momena Khatun are concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioners prays for a direction upon the SIR Tribunal to dispose of the appeals filed by the petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 as early as possible. 2 4. In view of the above, the Appellate Tribunal is requested to consider and dispose of the appeals preferred by the petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. 5. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.

6. Urgent Photostat certified copy, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Krishna Rao, J.)

01.09.2026 Court No.25 In the High Court at Calcutta D/L No.275 S. Gayen Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA 16784 of 2026 Md Muslehuddin & Ors. Versus The Union of India & Ors. Mr. Omar Faruk Gazi Mr. Pratikur Rahaman Ms. Bidisha Das … for the Petitioners Ms. Anamika Pandey …for the ECI Ms. Rashmi Bothra …for the Union of India 1. Though there are altogether seven petitioners have filed the present writ application but this Court finds that the petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 are the family members and the petitioner No.7 is not related to the petitioner Nos. 1 to 6. 2. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to pass any order in respect of petitioner No.7, namely, Isub Mahaldar but the petitioner No.7 is at liberty to take appropriate steps by filing separate application, if so advised. 3. As regards the petitioner Nos. 1 to 6, namely, Md. Muslehuddin, Nejamuddin Sekh, Selim Sekh, Sarifa Khatun, Aklima Bibi @ Aklima Khatun and Momena Bibi @ Momena Khatun are concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioners prays for a direction upon the SIR Tribunal to dispose of the appeals filed by the petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 as early as possible. 2 4. In view of the above, the Appellate Tribunal is requested to consider and dispose of the appeals preferred by the petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. 5. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.

6. Urgent Photostat certified copy, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Krishna Rao, J.)