Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 30927 (CAL)

TUKAUZZAMAN GAZI v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/16858/2026 · 2026-07-27

Suvra Ghosh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

24 jdt. 27.07.2026 jb. WPA 16858 of 2026 (Tukauzzaman Gazi vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) Mr. Shounak Ghosh Mr. Rajesh Naskar Amir Ali Sekh …. For the Petitioner Mr. Indrajit Roychowdhury Mr. Arghya Chatterjee …. For the State Mr. Mukteswar Maity Ms. Manika Sarkar …. For the Respondent no. 9 Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. The Panchayat Pradhan is not represented despite service. The petitioner claims to be the co-sharer in respect of the plot in question with the private respondent and alleges that the private respondent has raised construction therein without obtaining sanction from the concerned Panchayat. The petitioner submitted a representation in this regard before the concerned authority on 23rd June, 2026 which is yet to be considered. The petitioner seeks consideration of the same. Denying such allegation, learned counsel for the private respondent submits that the parties are co-shares in respect of the said property and a civil suit is pending between them. The private respondents purchased the property alongwith an 2 old structure standing thereon and has not raised any new structure in the plot. The contention of the parties need to be verified by the appropriate authority. Since the representation submitted by the petitioner in this regard is pending, the Pradhan, Usthi Gram Panchayat, being the 7th respondent herein, is directed to consider and dispose of the same within four weeks from the date of communication of this order upon granting reasonable opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioner and the private respondent, in accordance with law. The parties shall be at liberty to produce all relevant documents in support of their respective contention before the concerned authority at the time of hearing. The decision taken by the authority shall be communicated to the parties within a week thereof. In the event the construction allegedly raised by the private respondent is found to be illegal/unauthorised, the concerned authority shall take necessary steps in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. Since no affidavit has been invited, allegations contained in the writ petition shall be deemed not to have been admitted. 3 Urgent certified website copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of requisite formalities. (Suvra Ghosh, J.)