06.08.2026 21 Court No. 05 (DL) (Suvendu Mukherjee) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction (APPELLATE SIDE) WPA 18057 of 2026 Damos Beel Area Fish Production Group & Anr. –Versus – The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Anindya Sundar Das Mr. Shaunak Ghosh Mr. Syed Ali Afzol Ms. Paramita MOndal Mr. Suva Gayen Mr. Suman Halder Ms. Madhurim Dutta Ms. Susmita Das Ms. Rebika Sultana Mr. Anjuvab Das ….for the petitioner Mr. Indrajit Roy Chowdhury, Ld. AGP Mr. Sudipta Ghosh …..for the State respondents Mr. Mukteswar Maity Ms. Manika Sarkar ….for the respondent nos. 9 & 10 1) Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioners is taken on record. 2) Learned advocate representing the petitioners alleges overt action on the part of the concerned police authorities as a result whereof petitioners are restrained from getting involved in pisciculture in connection with a waterbody. Mandamus is prayed for thereby directing the concerned police authorities to 2 take steps in accordance with law which would facilitate the petitioners to run business of pisciculture. 3) During course of hearing, learned Additional Government Pleader representing the State respondents files a communication of Officer-in- Charge, Sagardighi Police Station and same is taken on record. A copy of said communication is made over to learned advocate representing the petitioners. 4) It is disclosed in said communication that in a writ petition concerning said waterbody where petitioners want to do pisciculture an order was passed by a coordinate Bench on 10th July, 2024. Petitioners were the respondents in that writ petition being WPA 2693 of 2024. Direction was given by the coordinate Bench as contained in said order dated 10th July, 2024 thereby directing District Land & Land Reforms Officer to take steps for demarcation of the waterbody after granting opportunity of hearing to all the necessary parties. 5) Though it is submitted that such demarcation has been made on completion of exercise by the concerned District Land & Land Reforms Officer in terms of the order dated 10th July, 2024 passed by the coordinate Bench but nothing is demonstrated before this Court that as per order of District Land & Land Reforms Officer petitioners’ right was decided to be involved in pisciculture in connection with waterbody in question. 3 6) In view of aforesaid scenario, present writ petition is not interfered with and same stands dismissed. 7) However, this order shall not preclude the petitioner to approach appropriate forum in pursuit of remedy, if so advised. 8) Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on usual undertaking. (Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)