04 Ranajit (AR.CT) 24.08.2026 Ct.05 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction (Appellate Side) W.P.A. NO 18697 OF 2026 Jay Sankar Mistri -vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Jyoti Prakash Chatterjee, Mr. Arpan Guha, Ms. Snehaa Sanyal ….for the petitioner. Mr. Supritim Dhar, Mr. Santimay Bhattacharyya, Mr. Ziaul Haque, Mr. Anirban Das, ….for the respondent no.6. 1. Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. 2. By presenting this writ petition, petitioner has prayed for direction upon the concerned police authorities to take steps which would permit petitioner to make construction. It is submitted that there is inaction on the part of concerned police authorities based on complaint lodged. 3. Mr. Dhar, learned senior advocate representing respondent no.6 has opposed this writ petition and submitted that one suit was instituted by respondent no.6 being Title Suit No.441 of 2021 which is pending before the civil court. 4. It is also submitted that an ex parte ad interim order of injunction was passed by civil court on 3rd August, 2021 thereby directing parties to the suit to maintain status quo in respect of nature, character, possession and alienation of suit property for a limited period. However, it is contended that time to time ad interim order of injunction was extended and it still subsists. 5. State respondents are not represented by learned advocate. 6. Having considered respective submissions made on behalf of parties and taking note of order passed by the civil court on 3rd August, 2021 it appears that there is an inter se dispute between parties over the plot of land and petitioner is praying for direction which would enable petitioner to make construction. 7. According to respondent no.6, construction by the petitioner would encroach upon land of respondent no.6 which is subject matter of suit pending before the civil court. 8. In view of aforesaid scenario, this Court does not find it fit to direct police authorities to take steps permitting petitioner to make construction. 9. Petitioner needs to approach civil court in pursuit of remedy, if it is found that petitioner’s right to construct is being infringed. 10. In aforesaid conspectus, present writ petition is not interfered with and same stands dismissed. 11. However, this order shall not preclude petitioner to approach appropriate forum in pursuit of remedy. 12. Parties to act on the server copy of this order duly 2 downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.) 3