08.07.2026 Sl. No. 84 Ct No. 5 SG WPA 12004 of 2026 Gulshanara Begum Vs The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Dhananjay Banerjee, Sk. Samiul Haque. …for the petitioner Mr. Suryaneel Das, ld. AGP. Ms. Anita Kundu, Ms. Sumita Sarkar. …for the State Mr. Tapas Kr. Dey, Mr. Rakesh Roy. …for respondent no. 5 1. Communication filed on behalf of the State respondent dated 27th June, 2026 of Officer-in-Charge, Pandua Police Station is taken on record. Copies of the said communication are made over to the learned advocates representing the petitioner and respondent no. 5. 2. A case is made out in the writ petition that in spite of liberty was granted by the Hon’ble Division Bench vide order dated 5th June, 2012 passed on an appeal being FAT 443 of 2011 violation of the order of status quo as directed by the Hon’ble Division Bench is being reported to the concerned police authorities instead of bringing it to the notice of the Hon’ble Division Bench by filing a proper application. 3. Learned advocate representing respondent no. 5 submits that partition suit was dismissed which was 2 instituted by the petitioner and thereafter appeal was preferred by the petitioner being FAT 443 of 2011. It is also contended that during pendency of the appeal and subsistence of status quo order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench petitioner was making construction as a result whereof complaints were lodged before the concerned police authorities. 4. However, learned advocate representing the petitioner disputes such submission made on behalf of the respondent no. 5 that construction was made by the petitioner in violation of the order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench on 5th June, 2012. 5. Copy of the order of the Hon’ble Division Bench dated 5th June, 2012 passed on FAT 443 of 2011 is placed before this Court and the same is taken on record. Relevant part of the said order dated 5th June, 2012 is quoted below:- “The parties are directed to maintain status quo in respect of the suit property in question. If they wish to disturb the status quo, they may pray for appropriate leave before this Court, upon notice to the other parties.” 6. Hon’ble Division Bench directed the parties to maintain status quo with rider that if any of the party wishes to disturb the status quo they are required to obtain appropriate leave from the Hon’ble Division Bench. 7. If without taking leave from the Hon’ble Divison Bench status quo order is violated by making construction and same is reported to the concerned 3 police authorities, police authorities are required to take steps in accordance with law if necessary by initiating appropriate criminal proceeding. 8. In view of the order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench on 5th June, 2012 no further order need be passed in this writ petition except giving direction upon the petitioner and the respondent no. 5 that if any of the party intends to take steps disturbing status quo, they are required to obtain necessary leave from the Hon’ble Division Bench. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. 10. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities. (Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)