28.07.2026 Court No.25 D/L No.3 S. Gayen In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA 18588 of 2026 Chottodal Club Versus Union of India & Ors. Mr. Shibaji Kumar Das Mr. Debarshi Brahma Mr. Subarna Barik Mr. Sayantan Maity Mr. Dipendu Sarkar …for the Petitioner Mr. Dhiraj Kr. Trivedi, Ld. ASG Ms. Rashmi Bothra …for the Union of India Mr. Lokenath Chatterjee Mr. Anjan Chakraborty Ms. Avantika Chakraborty …for the State Ms. Sonal Sinha Mr. Ankit Sureka …for the Howrah Municipal Corporation Mr. Rajdeep Bhattacharya Mr. Sauradeep Dutta …for the Respondent No.8 1. Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken on record. 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ application challenging the action of the railway authorities for eviction of the petitioner without giving any opportunity of hearing. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon the order passed by the learned National Green Tribunal dated November 2, 2017 wherein the learned Tribunal has directed the authorities before eviction of the illegal occupant, an opportunity of hearing is to be given to the illegal occupant. Learned counsel for the 2 petitioner submits that the railway authorities, without complying with the order passed by the learned Tribunal and without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, are trying to evict the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that subsequently the learned Tribunal has passed the final order on July 4, 2022 wherein the learned Tribunal has directed the authorities to take appropriate steps for removal of the encroachment but even after the order of the learned Tribunal on July 2, 2022, the authorities have not issued any notice or no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the communication dated September 13, 2018 wherein the railway authorities have passed an order directing the petitioner to vacate the land in question within fifteen days from the date of publication of the order. By referring the said order, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said order was also passed without giving any opportunity of hearing. He further submits that the order was passed on September 13, 2028 but now railway authorities are going to execute the said order without giving any opportunity of hearing and without serving the copy of the said order. 5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the railway authorities submits that in terms of the order passed by the learned National Green Tribunal dated November 2, 2017, the railway authorities have issued 3 notice to the petitioner but the petitioner refused to accept the same and accordingly, the notice was pasted at the premises by fixing the date of hearing on May 21, 2018 at 17:30 hours. The learned counsel for the railway authorities have also handed over the documents showing that several persons have appeared in terms of the said notice but the petitioner has not appeared before the authorities in terms of the said notice. Accordingly, after hearing the parties and after going through the records, the authorities came to know that the petitioner is an illegal occupant of the premises and passed the order dated September 13, 2018. The leaned counsel for the railway authorities further submits that though the order was passed in the year 2018 but the matter was pending before the learned National Green Tribunal and the learned Tribunal has disposed of the matter on July 4, 2022 by directing the railway authorities to take steps to remove the encroachment within three months from the periphery of the lake to the extent of area falling in its jurisdiction in accordance with law. In compliance of the said order of the learned Tribunal, the railway authorities are executing the said order dated September 13, 2018. 6. Learned counsel for the railway authorities has relied upon the order in the case of Chandannagar Station Area Hawkers Co-operative Society Limited, represented by Sri Debarata Dey vs. The Union of India & Ors. passed in WPA 18248 of 2024 dated 4 July 22, 2024 and submits that the similar matter came before this Court and this Court has upheld the order of eviction passed by the railway authorities. He further submits that the said order was carried in the appeal as well as before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court has upheld the order of eviction. He further submits that under Section 147 of the Railway Act, it is not necessary for giving any notice to the petitioner but in the present case the railway authorities have given the notice to the petitioner in terms of the order passed by the learned Tribunal dated November 2, 2017 but the petitioner failed to appear before the authorities and the authorities have passed impugned order. Thus, he prays for the rejection of the present writ application. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the Howrah Municipal Corporation submits that the learned National Green Tribunal has disposed of the matter on July 4, 2022 wherein certain directions have been passed and the Howrah Municipal Corporation is complying with the order passed by the learned Tribunal. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that if we go through the contents of the writ application, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the learned National Green Tribunal. He further submits that if the petitioner is affirmed with the order of the learned Tribunal, the petitioner has to prefer the appropriate appeal before the appropriate forum but 5 has filed writ petition. He further submits that the petitioner is the illegal occupant of the premises in question and the said has been decided by the railway authorities in the order dated September 13, 2018 but the petitioner has not challenged the said order before any court of law. He submits that the order has reached in its finality and now the petitioner cannot challenge the same in the present writ application. He further submits that the petitioner is in illegal occupation of the premises and is liable to be evicted. Accordingly, the railway authorities have taken appropriate steps for eviction of the petitioner from the railway land. 9. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. Perused the materials on record and the judgment relied upon by the railway authorities. 10. Admitted the petitioner is in occupation of the railway land. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner is an occupation of the said land since the year 1960 and the club has been registered under the Societies Registration Act in the year 1982. 11. The petitioner has relied upon the order passed by the learned Tribunal dated November 2, 2017 which reads as follows:- “We are informed that the illegal occupants in the area in question have not been provided with opportunities of individual hearing. Although it is stated on behalf of the Railway Authorities that orders of eviction had been issued on the basis of a common representation submitted by them, we are of 6 the view that each of the illegal occupants ought to be heard separately and separate orders passed against each of them as cause of action would arise in the case of each individual. If, therefore, any order has been issued to the detriment of the encroachers, fresh notices be issued against each of them and heard individually before any order to be passed.” 12. In terms of the order passed by the learned Tribunal, the railway authorities have issued the notice to the petitioner by fixing the date of hearing on May 21, 2018 at 17:30 hours. It is the specific case of the railways authorities that nobody has received the notice at the site of the petitioner and as such, the notice was pasted at the premises of the petitioner. It is not that only the notice has issued to the petitioner, several other persons who are in occupation of the railway land has been served with the notice and the all the persons have received the notice and appeared before the authorities. It appears from the note submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the railway authorities that the notice has been served to the several persons. The railway authorities have considered the documents available with them and come to the conclusion that the petitioner is the encroacher of the railway land and directed the petitioner to vacate the premises within fifteen days from the date of publication of the order. The petitioner has disclosed the said order in the writ application being Annexure-P3 page 22. As such, the petitioner cannot say that the petitioner has no 7 knowledge about the order dated September 13, 2018. The petitioner has not challenged the order of the authorities dated September 13, 2018. The specific case made out by the petitioner that the respondent authorities are intending to implement the order dated September 13, 2018 in the month of July, 2026. 13. It is the specific case of the railway authorities that though the railway authorities have passed the order in the year 2018 but the matter was pending before the learned National Green Tribunal, due to which, the said order was not implemented. The learned National Green Tribunal on July 4, 2022 has passed the following order:- “10. We are of the view that on account of pendency of above dispute, Municipal Corporation Howrah or the Railways cannot claim right to discharge untreated waste into the lake which is a criminal offence. Basic responsibility is of the Corporation to prevent such discharge. Giving land for settling encroacher is not the obligation of the Railways under any law. Thus, the Municipal Corporation Howrah must set up appropriate STP/pollution control mechanism to prevent raw sewage entering into lake as they are generating 82% of sewage. STP along with Garland Drain may be designed and operated so as to comply with standards of water quality of atleast " B " Class, as per orders of this Tribunal in respect of wetlands dated 25.11.2021 in OA No. 351/2019. All sources of sewage and its carriage system may be properly intercepted and diverted to 8 TP. No garbage be dumped in the lake or its peripheral boundaries. 11. Accordingly, in the interest of protection of lake and the Bird Sanctuary, leaving other pending issues to be resolved at any other appropriate forum as per law, we direct as follows: a) Municipal Corporation Howrah may take steps in the light of observations in para 10 above to set up necessary STP along with Garland Drain within four months to prevent discharge of untreated sewage into the lake by incurring cost from its own sources initially and sorting out its claim against the Railways separately. b) Cost of STP may be first borne by the State and its claim in respect to monetary liability of the Railway may be sorted out separately at appropriate forum in accordance with law. c) The Railway may provide land for the purpose of setting up of STP subject to the property remaining the Railway property without prejudice to its claim for user charges for the said land. d) Railways may take steps to remove encroachment within three months from the periphery of the lake to the extent of area falling in its jurisdiction in accordance with law. e) The District Administration may provide necessary assistance for such eviction as per law. If any dispute arises in this regard, it will be open to the concerned parties to remedy the same at appropriate forum in accordance with law. The application is disposed of. The State PCB may also take action in accordance with the provision of the Water 9 (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 to prevent and remedy pollution.” 14. In the said order, the learned Tribunal has categorically directed the railway authorities to remove the encroachment within three months. Accordingly, the railways authorities are implementing the order dated September 13, 2018 by evicting the petitioner from railway land. 15. This Court finds that the petitioner refused to accept the notice of hearing. The notice was pasted at the wall of the premises but none appeared before the authorities at the time of hearing of the case. It is not the case of the petitioner that the land is allotted to the petitioner. Petitioner has admitted that he is in occupation of railway land. The only issue raised by the petitioner that no notice was served but in the order dated September 13, 2018 it is categorically mentioned that none has accepted notice on behalf of the petitioner and notice was pasted at the wall of the premises. 16. Considering the above, this Court did not find any reasons to interfere with the impugned order dated September 13, 2018. 17. Accordingly, WPA 18588 of 2026 is dismissed. 18. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 19. Urgent Photostat certified copy, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with all formalities. (Krishna Rao, J.)