03.07.2026 sayandeep Sl. No. 06 Ct. No. 03 WPA 5646 of 2026 With CAN 1 of 2026 Tanuj Roy Vs. The KMC & ors. Mr. Sanjib Dawn Mr. Ranabir Banerjee Mr. Samrat Dey Paul …. for the petitioner Ms. Sayani Chatterjee Ms. Priyanka Mukherjee ….. for the respondent No. 8 Mr. Alok Kr. Ghosh Mr. Nilanjan Chatterjee …. For the KMC 1. The present writ petition has been filed complaining that though a demolition order was sought to be enforced in respect of premises No. 68A/26A, Raja Subodh Chandra Mullick Road, Ward No. 96, Borough-X, no notice was served on the petitioner who claims to have constructed on the said property. According to the petitioner, without any prior notice in connection with demolition case No. 20-D/Br.-X/24- 25, the municipality had proceeded with the demolition. It is for those facts that this Court had directed the municipality to carry out an inspection and file a report. This Court had also passed an order of status quo regarding possession and/or restrained the respondents from altering the nature and WPA 5646 of 2026 character thereof till the matter was taken up next or until further orders. 2. The municipality has since filed a report. From the report filed by the municipality dated 16th June, 2026 which has been circulated to the learned advocates for the parties. It would transpire that in the ground floor of the aforesaid premises according to the sanctioned building plan at the south-east and eastern direction which was sanctioned for a parking space has been converted to three number of shops unauthorizedly. It has also been provided that in the south-eastern corner of the premises, one sanctioned car parking has been unauthorizedly changed to paints and hardware shop. Accordingly, when the municipality attempted to demolish the same in terms of the order of the Special Officer (Building) dated 11th December, 2025, notice under Sections 544 and 546 of the KMC Act, 1980 was issued. The municipality, however, succeeded in demolishing only a part of the wall of the unauthorized shop room situated intermediately in the western side of the premises. All other shops are under lock and key. The report, further records that the department has also demolished two brick walls and the RCC roof of the unauthorized room constructed upon the sanctioned G+3 storied residential building. The materials disclosed in Court, does not demonstrate that the person responsible was heard. No document has been placed before this WPA 5646 of 2026 Court to demonstrate that there has been compliance in accordance with the provisions of the first proviso to Section 400(1) of the said Act. Farless any reasonable opportunity, no opportunity to show cause was given even to the person responsible. 3. In the circumstances as aforesaid, this Court is inclined to set aside the entire demolition proceedings including the demolition order issued by the Special Officer Building dated 11th December, 2025 along with all consequential notices. This order shall, however, not stand in the way of the municipality from proceeding further in accordance with law. 4. There shall, however, be an order directing the parties to maintain an order of status quo as regards the nature and character and possession of the premises for a period of two weeks within which the municipality may proceed. 5. It is made clear that if the municipality does not proceed within the aforesaid period, the aforesaid injunction shall no longer survive. It is also made clear that in the event, if the municipality wishes to proceed, the person responsible shall not only be given a notice but shall be afforded with a reasonable opportunity of hearing. 6. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)