21 07.07.2026 sb Ct.3. IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA 12323 of 2026 Smt. Promila Roy Versus The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors. Mr. Imdadul Biswas … For the petitioner. Mr. Debjit Mukherjee Ms. Priyanka Jana … For the Kolkata Municipal Corporation. 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court is taken on record. 2. Complaining illegal construction at the behest of the respondent no.7 at R.S. Dag No.92, Khatian Nos. 119, 121,124 and 126, Scheme Plot No.5, Mouza- Nawabad, Ward No.109 under Borough-XII and the failure on the part of the municipal authorities to take note of the petitioner’s complaint, the instant writ petition has been filed. 3. The learned advocate representing the petitioner has also drawn attention of this Court to the plaint filed in Title Suit no.274 of 2026, pending before the Court of the 3rd Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Alipore. 4. From the perusal of the plaint it would transpire that the suit is for declaration and permanent injunction. 5. Learned advocate for the petitioner has also placed before this Court the order dated 26th February, 2026 passed by the learned Court and would submit that 2 WPA 12323 of 2026 there is subsisting interim order in the form of status quo with regard to the nature, character and activity of the suit property. 6. The municipality is represented and has placed before this Court a report dated 7th July, 2026, issued by the Executive Engineer (Civil), Building Department, Br.XII, Kolkata Municipal Corporation, which is taken on record. 7. From the aforesaid report, it would transpire that a sanction has been accorded in respect of G+4 storey building vide building permit dated 16th August, 2024 in favour of the respondent no.7 at R.S. Dag No.92, Khatian Nos. 119, 121, 124 and 126, Scheme Plot No.5 Mouza – Nawabad, Ward No. 109 under Borough-XII. The report further records that a joint inspection was conducted in presence of the jurisdictional BL&LRO concerned and the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Assessment Department at the subject plot for identification of the plot as both parties have claimed ownership of the plot. 8. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties I find that the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent no.7 is with regard to ownership and identification of the suit property. The petitioner claims that the respondent no.7 is trying to encroach upon the petitioner’s property. 9. Having regard to the aforesaid and considering the materials on record, I am of the view that there is no scope for this Court to direct the municipality to decide 3 WPA 12323 of 2026 on the issue of encroachment as the municipality is not competent to adjudicate the same. This apart, the aforesaid issue is pending adjudication before the competent civil Court. 10. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of without any order. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for be given to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)