JUDGMENT : The Court: - The petitioner in this art. 226 petition dated February 4, 2011 is aggrieved by an order of the Sub-Divisional Officer (Sadar) Berhampore, Murshidabad dated February 1, 2011 (at p.24) the relevant part whereof is quoted below:- “Returning herewith the application made by him along with related papers for holding Mela-cum-Fair at K.N. College Ground from 04.02.2011 to 05.03.2011 as it was not recommended by Inspector-in-Charge, Berhampore Police Station. This is for his information.” Both the petitioner and the private respondent (Sri Pankaj Ghosh, Secretary, Berhampore Mela Committee) applied to the Additional District Magistrate and District Land & Land Reforms Officer, Murshidabad for permission to use K.N. College ground (a Government land) on a temporary basis for holding a fair. By a letter dated January 3, 2011 (at p.26) the ADM & DLLRO directed the applicants to appear before him. After hearing them he granted the permission to the petitioner. By a letter dated January 13, 2010 (sic) (at p.20) the Block Land & Land Reforms Officer, Sadar, Berhampore, Murshidabad asked the petitioner to pay Rs.2,46,246 fee for temporary use of K.N. College ground during the period from February 1, 2011 to March 5, 2011. The petitioner paid the amount on January 14, 2011. While by a letter dated January 17, 2011 (at p.22) the BLLRO granted The petitioner permission to use the ground, by a letter dated January 19, 2011 (at p.23) the Director-General, West Bengal Fire & Emergency Services gave the petitioner the statutory permission. The petitioner then submitted an application dated January 20, 2011 (at p.25) to the SDO, through the inspector in charge of the police station, for permission to hold the fair using the ground. On January 22, 2011 the inspector in charge forwarded the application to the SDO recording his disapproval of the request. Accepting the disapproval, the SDO gave the impugned decision. On January 22, 2011 the inspector in charge forwarded the application to the SDO recording his disapproval of the request. Accepting the disapproval, the SDO gave the impugned decision. The writing of the inspector in charge dated January 22, 2011 is as follows: “Forwarded & Not Recommended to S.D.O. (sadar) as the another organisation had submitted prayer & this was duly forwarded to S.D.O (S) in earlier occasion & mela (proposal) on the same day (Time).” Counsel for the private respondent justifying the decisions of the inspector in charge disapproving the petitioner’s request and the SDO refusing permission to the petitioner, has produced copies of the private respondent’s application dated January 10, 2011 to the SDO through the inspector in charge for permission to hold a fair during the period from February 11, 2011 to March 21, 2011 using the YMA ground, and the order of the SDO dated February 1, 2011 granting the private respondent permission. In the face of the decision of the ADM & DLLRO dated January 3, 2011 granting the petitioner permission to hold a fair using the K.N. College ground and refusing permission to the private respondent, and the steps taken by the BLLRO on January 13, 2011 and January 17, 2011 and the Director-General of the West Bengal Fire & Emergency Services on January 19, 2011, it is inconceivable that the inspector in charge receiving the private respondent’s application dated January 10, 2011 only on January 21, 2011 could push out the petitioner’s application dated January 20, 2011 received by him on that same day. It is evident that the inspector in charge pushing in the private respondent acted mala fide, and that the SDO was sitting ready to accept blindly the decision of the inspector in charge. The inspector in charge has trampled on the petitioner’s right to freedom of expression and the SDO is guilty of acting negligently. Apart from the fact that the private respondent applied for permission to hold a fair using a ground adjacent to K.N. College ground, it is inconceivable how his application dated January 10, 2011 submitted on January 21, 2011 could by treated as the one filed earlier. Apart from the fact that the private respondent applied for permission to hold a fair using a ground adjacent to K.N. College ground, it is inconceivable how his application dated January 10, 2011 submitted on January 21, 2011 could by treated as the one filed earlier. For these reasons, I set aside the order of the SDO dated February 1, 2011 and the decision of the inspector in charge dated January 22, 2011, and direct all the official respondents to permit the petitioner to use K.N. College ground on a temporary basis for holding the fair during the period that suits the petitioner, and they shall grant the petitioner permission within three working days the petitioner approaches them. The Registrar General of this Court shall send a copy of this order to the Director General of Police, West Bengal for necessary action. No costs.