19.06.2025 Item No.10 gd/ssd WPA(P)/44/2025 SUMANA BISWAS AND ORS. VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. IA NO: CAN/1/2025, CAN/2/2025, CAN/3/2025, CAN/4/2025 Mr. Anjan Bhattacharya, Ms. Anita Shaw, Ms. Shreyeta Mitra ..for the Applicants. Mr. Kamalesh Jha, Mr. Amitabha Ghosh, Ms. Nabanita Chatterjee ..for the Petitioners. Mr. Sk. Md. Gkalib, Mr. Abu Siddique Mallik ..for the State. 1. We have heard the learned advocates for either of the parties. 2. There are four interlocutory applications, namely, CAN 1 of 2025, CAN 2 of 2025, CAN 3 of 2025 and CAN 4 of 2025. 3. CAN 1 of 2025 has been filed to recall and/or modify the order dated 27.2.2025 by which the writ petition was finally disposed of 4. The primary ground on which the application is filed that the applicants were not made parties. 5. On going through the order dated 27.2.2025 we find that the court was conscious of the fact that the proper and necessary parties were not impleaded as respondents and, therefore, the court declined to grant any positive directions. 2 6. However, since the illegalities were found, the 5th respondent in the writ petition was directed to take immediate steps to stop the illegal construction and thereafter issue notice to the persons concerned and proceed to take action in accordance with law. 7. It appears that the authorities misconstrued the scope of the order and initiated certain coercive action. 8. This was directed to be stopped by virtue of an interim order granted in this application dated 25th March, 2025. 9. In the light of the above, the question of recalling and/or modifying the order passed in the writ petition does not arise. 10. Accordingly, CAN 1 of 2025 stands dismissed. 11. CAN 2 of 2025 has been filed by the very same applicants praying for addition of parties. 12. In the light of the submissions made by the learned Government counsel, and the subsequent proceedings initiated by the authorities the applicants, namely, Beauti Das (Biswas) and Parimal Haldar have already been heard. 13. Therefore, CAN 2 of 2025 stands allowed and the learned advocate for the writ petitioners to amend the cause-title in the writ petition. 3 14. CAN 3 of 2025 has been filed to vacate the order dated 27.2.2025. 15. As observed while dismissing CAN 1 of 2025 the question of vacating the order would not arise, more particularly when subsequent action has been taken by the authorities and the newly added respondents have participated the hearing. 16. Hence, CAN 3 of 2025 stands dismissed. 17. CAN 4 of 2025 has been filed by the newly added parties praying for recalling and/or modifying the order. 18. Such prayer cannot be acceded to for the reasons mentioned above and CAN 4 of 2025 stands dismissed. 19. There is an allegation made by the newly added respondents that their signatures were forged in the writ petition. 20. Affidavit-in-opposition has been filed by the 18 writ petitioners, namely, Kiranmoy Bagchi in which they have made certain averments as to how the writ petitioner nos.1 to 17, 21, 22, 24, 27 and 28 put their signatures in the Vakalatnama pursuant to a joint meeting and thereafter the Vakalatnama stated to have been handed over to the writ petitioner no.19, namely, Lipika Das, who said to have been taken initiative gathering all the petitioners and she obtained signatures of all the writ petitioners including those 4 petitioners in the instant application, namely, Beauti Das (Biswas) and Parimal Haldar. 21. If, according to Beauti Das (Biswas) and Parimal Haldar, their signatures have been forged, the subsequent remedy is available under the various statutes and it will be well open to two persons to exercise their right by going before the appropriate authority or the appropriate court having jurisdiction. 22. The learned Government counsel has submitted that this court by disposing of the writ petition was conscious of the fact that the proper persons have not been impleaded and, therefore, no positive direction was issued and subsequently after the order was properly explained to the authorities, the authorities have issued notices to the parties including Beauti Das (Biswas) and Parimal Haldar and they have participated in the hearing and an order has also been passed. 23. In this regard, a report has been submitted by the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Santipur, Nadia and the said report is placed on record. (T. S. SIVAGNANAM) CHIEF JUSTICE (CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.)