Ct.No.19 D/L 22.07.2026 23 Saikat Mukherjee WPA/21103/2024 MANIK LAL BAG AND ORS. VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Mr. Sudeep Sanyal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Snehasis Jana, Adv. …For the Writ Petitioners Mr. Soumak Bera, Adv. …For the Union of India/ Railway Authority Mr. Sushanta Dutta, Adv. Mr. Suchindram Bhattacharjee, Adv. …For the Respondent-State 1. The writ petitioners, Respondent-Union of India and Respondent-State are represented by their respective learned counsel. 2. By filing the instant writ petition the writ petitioners have prayed for issuance of appropriate writ/writs against the respondent-authorities commanding them to fill up the trench that has been dug on L.R. Plot No.603 and 604 in Mouza-Chiyapara, under P.S.-Jamboni, District-Jhargram, so that the writ petitioners have an access to the Highway through those lands which are servient estate to their land, along with other reliefs. 3. On careful perusal of the instant petition it appears that the writ petitioner is practically seeking direct access to the National Highway No.6, which is evident from the paragraph-4 of the instant writ petition. This Court considers that for effective adjudication of the instant writ petition paragraph-4 of the instant writ petition is required to be re- produced and the same is quoted hereinbelow in verbatim:- “4. Just in front of the Plot purchased by the petitioners is National Highway no 6 and which is marked by Pillars. To be precise R.S plot No:392 and 393 (Now L.R Plot No.603 and 604) are absolutely in front of the Petitioner’s lands and provide the only ingress and egress to the plots from the Highway. Mischievously the private respondents, after the Petitioners purchased their plots, have tried to block the Petitioners ingress and egress of the highway saying that L.R Plot no 603 and 604 belonged to them and they are the recorded owners of it.” 4. On careful perusal of the aforementioned paragraph-4 it, thus, appears to this Court that it is the specific case of the writ petitioners that the writ petitioners’ property is situated beside the National Highway No.6 and they seek direct access to their land from the said National Highway authority for their egress and ingress. At this juncture, this Court proposes to look to section 28 of the Control of National Highways (Land and Traffic) Act, 2002 (‘Act of 2002’ in short) and the same is quoted hereinbelow in verbatim:- “28. Right of access.-(1) No person shall have right of access to a Highway either through any vehicle or on foot by a group of five or more persons except permitted by the Highway Administration either generally or specifically in the manner specified in section 29. (2) The access to a Highway under sub- section (1) shall be subject to the guidelines and instructions issued by the Central Government from time to time. (3) The Highway Administration may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare a Highway or any portion thereof to be limited for access in the manner as specified in such notification and may also impose any restriction or control on such access to, from or across such Highway as specified in that notification.” 5. On careful perusal of the aforementioned legislative provision it, thus, appears to this Court that it is the legislative mandate that a person shall not have any right to access Highway either through any vehicle or on foot by a group of five or more persons except permitted by the Highway Administration. It, thus, appears to this Court that the writ petitioners are seeking relief which is completely barred under section 28(1) of the said Act of 2002. 6. In view of such, the reliefs as sought for cannot be granted. 7. With the aforementioned observation, the instant writ petition is dismissed. 8. There shall be no order as to costs. 9. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, on priority basis, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.)