OD-16 WPO/357/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE M Safiulla Wakf Estate Versus Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors. Before: The Hon’ble Justice RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY Date: 6th August 2026 Appearance: Mr. Ranajit Chatterjee, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. N. G. Khaitan, Advocate Mr. Anirban Mitra, Advocate for the State Mr. Alak Kumar Ghosh, Advocate Mr. Swapan Kr. Debnath, Advocate for the KMC 1. Complaining illegal construction at flat no.12, Park Palace, 1, Gopal Mukherjee Road, Kolkata – 700017, the instant writ petition has been filed. 2. Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate appears for the municipal authorities. Mr. Suleman, learned advocate seeks to intervene in the present writ petition on behalf of the Board of Wakf. 3. Having heard the learned advocate appearing for the respective parties, I find that a complaint has been lodged by Mutawalli of M. Safiulla Wakf Estate. From the aforesaid complaint it would transpire that as per the Mutalli’s claim the property in question is a 2 Grade – I heritage structure and an illegal construction has been undertaken which may endanger the said property. 4. Having regard to the peculiar fact, I am of the view that the municipal authorities must take steps in the matter and carry out an inspection unless the same has already been undertaken. If on the basis of the inspection to be made by the municipal authorities any unauthorised and/or illegal construction is noted, appropriate steps shall be taken by the municipal authorities in accordance with law to arrest the construction. Due care must be taken by the municipal authorities having regard to the claim made by the petitioner that the above property is a Grade – I heritage structure. 5. It is, however, made clear that the municipality shall act independently on the basis of the inquiry to be conducted by them without in any way being influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove. It is expected that the inquiry shall conducted by the municipal authorities within three working days from the date of communication of this order. 6. Since no affidavit has been invited, allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents. 7. The writ petition, thus, stands disposed of. (RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY, J.) R. Bose