Ct.No.19 DL 16.07.2026 100 Saikat Mukherjee WPA/13797/2026 HARISADHAN KOLEY AND ORS. VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. Mr. Uday Sankar Chattopadhyay, Adv. Ms. Trisha Rakshit, Adv. Ms. Rajashree Tah, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Datta, Adv. Ms. Bidisha Chakraborty, Adv. Ms. Saumili Karmakar, Adv. .…For the Petitioners Mr. Nilanjan Bhattacharjee, Sr. Standing Counsel Ms. Jayita Dhar Chakraborty, Jr. Govt. Adv. Mr. Joy Ranjan Dhar, Adv. …For the Respondent-State 1. Affidavit-of-service as filed on behalf of the writ petitioners is taken on record. 2. The writ petitioners and the Respondent-State are represented by their respective learned counsel. 3. By filing the instant writ petition the writ petitioners have prayed for issuance of appropriate writ/writs against the respondent authorities, more specifically against the Respondent No.2 authority, commanding him to furnish the award to each of the writ petitioners so as to enable the writ petitioners to avail the remedy under section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (‘Act of 1956’ in short). 4. At the time of hearing, Mr. Chattopadhyay, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners, submits before this Court that it is the specific case of the writ petitioners that the land of the writ petitioners have been acquired and all on a sudden, some amount was found to be credited in the accounts of the writ petitioners on account of land acquisition proceeding towards compensation. However, no award is either published or copy thereof has been provided to the writ petitioners by the competent authority i.e. the Respondent No.2 herein. 5. Drawing attention to Page Nos.24, 25 and 26 of the writ petition, being copies of the representations dated 02.04.2026, it is submitted by Mr. Chattopadhyay that under cover of such representations dated 02.04.2026 writ petitioners requested the Respondent No.2 authority to provide them the copies of the award so as to enable them to approach the appropriate authority under section 3G(5) of the Act of 1956 but in vain. 6. Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent/State submits before this Court that the Respondent No.2 authority may be directed to consider the representations dated 02.04.2026 respectively in accordance with law. 7. In view of such, this Court, while disposing the instant writ petition, directs the Respondent No.2 authority to consider the representations dated 02.04.2026 in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioners and shall pass a reasoned order on such representation within 30 working days from the date of communication of the server copy of this order. 8. The time limit, as fixed by this Court is peremptory and mandatory. 9. It is further made clear that in the event while considering the representations dated 02.04.2026 the Respondent No.2 authority finds sufficient merit in such representation of the writ petitioners, he shall forthwith provide the writ petitioners the copies of the award on account of acquisition of land of the writ petitioners. 10. Before parting with, it is, however, made clear that while disposing of the instant writ petition this Court has not gone into the merit of the instant writ petition and thus all points are kept open for adjudication by the Respondent No.11, if at all any request is made by the Respondent No.14 to the Respondent No.11 for removal of alleged encroachment. 11. With the aforementioned observations/directions, the instant writ petition is disposed of. 12. Liberty is given to the learned advocate-on-record for the writ petitioners to forward a server copy of this order to the Respondent No.2 authority, who is directed to act on the basis of server copy of this order. 13. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties expeditiously upon compliance of all legal formalities. (PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.)