JUDGMENT : BISWANATH SOMADDER, J. 1. By consent of the parties, the appeal is treated as on day’s list and taken up for consideration along with the connected application. 2. The instant appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 4th June, 2018, passed by a learned Single Judge in W.P. 7919 (W) of 2017 (Subrata Das vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.). 3. By the impugned judgment and order, the writ petition stood dismissed for reasons stated therein. 4. Now, the present appeal has been taken out by the writ petitioner. 5. On 29th August, 2018, when we had taken up the appeal earlier, we took note of the fact that the appellant/writ petitioner had, in fact, preferred a statutory appeal. As such, we had directed the learned advocate representing the concerned Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity to apprise the Court on or before the next date as to the fate of the said appeal. 6. Now, it transpires that the statutory appeal was taken up for consideration by the General Body of the concerned Cooperative Society in its meeting held on 2nd October, 2016. The appellant/writ petitioner was given an opportunity of hearing. He appeared before the General Body. The General Body passed an order supported with cogent reasons. A copy of the decision of the General Body of the concerned Cooperative Society was handed over to the learned advocate for the appellant on 3rd October, 2018. 7. As such, there cannot be any violation of the principles of natural justice. That apart and in any event, we do not find any palpable infirmity or perversity in the impugned judgment and order. In an Intra-Court Mandamus Appeal interference is usually warranted when palpable infirmities or perversities are noticed. Moreover, the impugned judgment and order is supported with cogent and justifiable reasons. 8. In such circumstances, the appeal and the connected application are liable to be dismissed and stand accordingly dismissed. 9. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties.