1 In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present: The Hon’ble Justice Partha Sarathi Sen WPA 28490 of 2022 Jahangir Dash & Anr. v. The State of West Bengal & Ors. For the Petitioner : Mr. Supratim Dhar Mr. Dhananjay Nayak For the State : Mr. Nilanjan Bhattacharjee Ms. Jayita Dhar Chakraborty Mr. Nillanjan Pal Ms. Avantika Chakraborty For the KMC : Mr. Alak Kumar Ghosh Mr. Arijit Dey Heard on and Judgment on : 15-09-2026 Partha Sarathi Sen, J.:- 1. By filing the instant writ petition, the writ petitioners have prayed for issuance of appropriate writ/writs against the respondent authorities, more specifically, against the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (‘KMC’ in short) commanding them to remove the signboard as has been fixed in the land, particulars of which has been mentioned in paragraph 5 of the instant writ petition along with other ancillary reliefs. 2 2. At the time of hearing, Mr. Dhar, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners submits before this Court that it is the specific case of the writ petitioners that one Smt. Halimannecha Bibi was the absolute owner of 21 Cottahs comprised in Dag No.918/1374, J.L. No.33, Touzi No.56, R.S. No.39 under Police Station Jadavpur, Khatian No.266 and Ward No.101 within the jurisdiction of Kolkata Municipal Corporation under Borough No.XI. 3. It is submitted that it is the further case of the writ petitioners that the predecessor-in-interest of the present writ petitioners purchased the said property by a registered deed of conveyance, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure P-1 and soon thereafter the predecessor-in-interest of the present writ petitioners mutated their names in the records of right, copies whereof have been annexed at page nos.46 and 45 of the instant writ petition. It is submitted further that in an earlier round of litigation being WP No.24944 (W) of 2007, a Coordinate Bench of this Court directed the KMC authorities to consider the mutation application as has been submitted by the petitioners’ predecessor-in-interest, in accordance with law, and to pass a reasoned order. It is submitted by Mr. Dhar that despite passing of the said order dated 03.06.2013 in WP No.24944 (W) of 2007, the KMC authorities went for an eternal slumber and did nothing. 4. In his next fold of submission, Mr. Dhar draws attention to the two reports dated 12.12.2017 and 13.12.2023, as submitted by the KMC authorities. Mr. Dhar submits before this Court that from the said two reports, it would reveal that after filing of the instant writ petition, the KMC authorities initiated the process of hearing of the mutation application in 3 respect of the property, which is subject matter of the instant writ petition and by an order dated 04.06.2025, the Chief Manager (Revenue)/Jadavpur Unit KMC not only rejected the prayer for mutation in respect of the property in question but also come to a finding that the property in question as involved in the instant writ petition has been vested to the KMC authorities by operation of law. 5. It is argued by Mr. Dhar that the reasoned order dated 04.06.2025 as passed by KMC authorities on the aforementioned mutation application has got no leg to stand upon, in view of the fact that the writ petitioners have filed sufficient materials to substantiate their ownerships over the property in question. Mr. Dhar submits that it is a fit case for granting reliefs to the writ petitioners, as prayed for. 6. In course of his submission, Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the KMC authorities draws attention of this Court to the prayers of the writ petition. It is argued by Mr. Ghosh that in view of the order passed by the Chief Manager (Revenue)/Jadavpur Unit KMC on 04.06.2025 thereby holding that the property in question as involved in the instant writ petition stood vested with the KMC, no relief can be granted to the writ petitioners. 7. Mr. Pal, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent State supports the contention of Mr. Ghosh. 8. On careful perusal of the entire materials as placed before this Court and after hearing the learned advocates for the contending parties, it appears to this Court that for some reasons or other during the pendency of the instant writ petition i.e. on 04.06.2025, the respondent/KMC while 4 disposing the mutation application in respect of the property in question as involved in the instant writ petition not only rejected the prayer of the writ petitioners for mutation but also came to a finding that the property in question as involved in the instant writ petition stood vested to the KMC. 9. Admittedly, the said order dated 04.06.2025 as passed by the Chief Manager (Revenue)/Jadavpur Unit KMC is not subject matter of the instant writ petition. In considered view of this Court that, in the event, the said order of rejection of mutation vis-a-vis the order of vesting dated 04.06.2025 as passed by KMC authorities is/are not set aside by a competent Court of law, the writ petitioners are not entitled to the reliefs, as prayed for. 10. In view of such, this Court finds that in the instant writ petition no relief can be granted to the writ petitioners at this stage and, thus, the instant writ petition is hereby dismissed. 11. Before parting with, this Court grants liberty to the writ petitioners to approach the appropriate forum challenging the order of rejection of mutation as well as the order of vesting of the property in question as involved in the instant writ petition dated 04.06.2025, if so advised, and in such subsequent proceeding, the writ petitioners would be at liberty to make similar such prayers as made in the instant writ petition and, in the event, such similar prayers are made in the subsequent proceeding, the said prayers would not be treated as res judicata. 12.There shall, however, be no order as to costs. 5 13.Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all the necessary formalities. (Partha Sarathi Sen, J.) S.R. [AR(C)]