D/L- 21 22/04/2026 Ct. No.-19 Aritra WPA 27424 of 2025 Rajanti Koiri Vs. The Union of India & Ors. Mr. Prasad Bhattacharyya ….for the petitioner Mr. Ajay Kumar Dasgupta Ms. Kushi Prasun Chatterjee ….for the UOI Mr. Wasim Ahmed Mr. Harun Al Rashid ….for the State The petitioner claims to be the recorded owner of a property being R.S. Dag No.1003 and 1004 within Mouza- Prasadnagar, J.L. No.1 under Naihati Police Station in the District of North 24-Parganas. The petitioner intended to carry out certain works relating to beautification and gardening in respect of the aforesaid property. The petitioner alleges that the authorities of the Port Trust have demanded a sum of Rs.2.20 lakh on account of inspection fees for granting permission. The learned advocate appearing for the petitioner places reliance upon a procedure for grant of permission which is annexed at page 48 of the writ petition in support of his contention that the inspection fees is necessary only for the purpose of granting permission for construction and not for the purpose for which the petitioner sought for permission. He further submits that the decision on the 2 representation has not been communicated to the petitioner till date. The learned advocate appearing for the respondents submits that the decision on the representation dated September 11, 2025 shall be communicated to the petitioner within the time limit as may be fixed by this Court. Without entering into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner in the representation dated September 11, 2025 and without making any comment as to the applicability or otherwise of the guidelines annexed at page 48 of the writ petition, WPA 27424 of 2025 stands disposed of by directing the Director, Marine Department, Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port, Kolkata, being the respondent No.3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated September 11, 2025 in accordance with law, prevailing guidelines/notifications/rules and to dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order as expeditiously as possible but positively by the end of the month of May, 2026. In the event, any adverse decision against the petitioner on the representation dated September 11, 2025 is contemplated, the said authority shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioner within the time limit as mentioned hereinbefore. There will be no order as to costs. 3 All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)