Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 34527 (CAL)

R.D AD AND ANR v. COOCHBEHAR MUNICIPALITY AND ORS

WPA/1090/2026 · 2026-08-19

Aniruddha Roy

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 WPA 1090 of 2026 A.Roy, J. Form J(2) JPD Sl.No. 29 Moumita Court no. 10 In the High Court at Calcutta In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present: The Hon’ble Justice Aniruddha Roy WPA 1090 OF 2026 R. D. AD. & Anr. Vs. Coochbehar Municipality & Ors. For the Petitioners : Mr. Amalesh Roy, Sr. Adv. Mr. Nigam Mittal, Adv. For the State : Mr. Shubhankar Dutta, Adv. Mr. Tuhin Kumar Roy, Adv. Heard on : August 19, 2026. Judgment on : August 19, 2026. [In Court] Aniruddha Roy, J. : 1. Affidavit-of-service, filed in Court today is taken on record. 2. Mr. Amalesh Roy, learned Senior Advocate with Mr. Nigam Mittal, learned Advocate appears for the petitioners. 2 WPA 1090 of 2026 A.Roy, J. 3. Mr. Shubhankar Dutta, learned Advocate with Mr. Tuhin Kumar Roy, learned Advocate appears for the State. 4. None appears for the rest of the respondents. 5. Mr. Amalesh Roy, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners submit that, pursuant to an observation made by the Executive Officer Coochbehar Municipality in its order dated March 16, 2026 Annexure P-8 at page 59 to the writ petition, the petitioner by its letter dated March 25, 2026 Annexure P-9 at page 63 to the writ petition has submitted a fresh proposal for erection of its own hoardings. The said proposal is still pending. 6. In view of the above, the respondent no. 4 is directed to consider the said proposal of the petitioner dated March 25, 2026 at page 63 to the writ petition positively within four weeks from the date of the communication of this order. 7. In the event of rejection the respondent no. 4 shall communicate the reasons for rejection in writing to the petitioner within a further period of two weeks from the date of the decision to be taken. 8. It is made clear that, this order shall not create any right or equity in favour of the petitioner, if the petitioner is found not eligible to receive his claim strictly in accordance with law. 9. Since affidavits are not called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents. 3 WPA 1090 of 2026 A.Roy, J. 10. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition WPA 1090 of 2026 stands disposed of, without any order as to costs. 11. Parties shall act on the basis of the server copy of this judgment duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Aniruddha Roy, J.)