18.02.2026 Ct. 3 Item No. 1 Saswata WPA 2677 of 2024 Shekh Saidul Islam Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Maidul Islam Kayal Mr. Noorul Amin Sardar Mr. Mohinur Mullick Mr. Sumit Naskar Mr. Archisman Singh …For the petitioner Mr. S.S.Arifin Mr. Susanta Rakshit …For the State Mr. Debashis Kundu, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raghunath Chakraborty Mr. Rajendra Nath Barik Mr. Rahul Singh …For the respondent nos. 2 to 5 Mr. Sayak Chakraborti Mr. W. Roy Mr. I. Das Mr. S. Chatterjee Mr. N. Molla Mr. F. Haidar …For the respondent no. 13 1. Pursuant to the order dated 4th February 2026 an affidavit of compliance has been filed by the respondent no. 3. From the aforesaid affidavit it would transpire that the municipality has enforced the demolition order dated 20th July 2023 by removing the cantilever which was protruding at the first floor level on the public street from the building of the private respondent. 2. At this stage, Mr. Kayal learned advocate appearing for the petitioner would submit that the entire construction that has come up is on a land which has been classified in the Record of Rights as pukur (tank). He has placed reliance on the letter dated 9th September 2022 issued by the BL and LRO addressed to the Chairman of Mahestala Municipality which forms part of the report filed by the respondent no. 5 on 17th December 2025 and contends that 2WPA 2677 of 2024 the construction is illegal. There, however, appears to be difficulty in accepting such contention. Previously, the writ petitioner had moved a writ petition which was registered as WPA 3681 of 2023. Although, the above issue was previously raised, however, such writ petition was disposed of by order dated 19th May 2023 by recording an undertaking given by the private respondent that the extended portion of the unauthorized cantilever shall be removed and that the private respondent shall produce conversion certificate before the Mahestala Municipality. 3. In response to a query from this Court, the learned advocate appearing for the private respondent by placing before this Court an application dated 9th June 2024 would submit that the private respondent has already applied before the DL and LRO for conversion of the plot in question from pukur (Tank) to bastu/pukur. Let a copy of the application be retained with the record. 4. Having regard to the disclosure made, since the application is pending consideration, I am of the view that at this stage, there is no scope to interfere any further in the matter. 5. This Court has, however, not expressed any view as to whether the conversion of the land is permissible. 6. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. 7. All parties shall act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from this Court’s official website. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)