ML-896 19.02.2026 Court No.15 [Bench ID-265781] (AD) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA 7818 of 2025 Sk. Safiqul Islam Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Soujanyo Pattanayak, Advocate Mr. Syed Murshid Alam, Advocate Mr. Subrata Ghosh, Advocate Mr. Sammik Bagchi, Advocate Mr. Mithun Mondal, Advocate Mr. Marid Hossain, Advocate … for the petitioner The petitioner alleges that Respondent Nos. 11 to 13 have undertaken unauthorized construction. However, the writ petition is conspicuously silent as to the nature and extent of the alleged unauthorized construction. The representations annexed thereto similarly fail to specify the particulars of the purported illegality. In one such representation, it is alleged that Respondent Nos. 9 to 12 have obstructed the staircase leading to the roof of the petitioner’s building. In another, it is stated that the said respondents are constructing a boundary wall and a residential structure. In the absence of clear and specific averments regarding the nature of the construction complained of, the petitioner cannot 2 reasonably expect a Writ Court to initiate or direct demolition proceedings. Relief under writ jurisdiction cannot be granted on the basis of vague and inconsistent allegations. Accordingly, WPA 7818 of 2025 is dismissed. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the learned Advocates for the parties on usual undertaking. (Kausik Chanda, J.)