27.08.2026 Ct. 3 Item No. AD 12 Saswata WPA 23006 of 2026 Dibakar Ray VS State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Ratul Das Mr. Sumitava Chakraborty Ms. B. Paramanick …For the Petitioner Mr. Shyama Prasad Purkait …For the respondent nos.3 and 4 Mr. Anirban Deb Ms. Aparna Bose …For the State 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is retained with the record. 2. Challenging a demolition notice dated 17th August 2026, whereby the petitioner has been directed to demolish a pucca RCC ramp which has been constructed without complying any safety measure, within 7 days, the instant writ petition has been filed. 3. According to the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, the petitioner has a statutory remedy available under the provisions of Section 218 of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) from an order passed under the said Act by the Board of Councilors. 4. In the instant case, it is submitted that the administrator has passed the order, who did not have the competence to pass the demolition order under Section 218 (3) of the said Act. 5. The municipality as also the State are represented. 6. The learned advocate appearing for the State has, however, drawn the attention of this Court to Section 431(3) of the said Act and would submit that once, the Board of Councilors is dissolved, all powers and functions vested upon the municipal 2 authorities under the said Act is to be exercised by the persons to be designated as administrator. 7. Having regard thereto, the order passed by the administrator cannot be said to be an order without jurisdiction. 8. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, I find that the municipal authorities are interested to seek demolition of a pucca RCC ramp which has been constructed without any sanctioned plan. Prima facie, the construction appears to be an illegal one, however, since it is submitted that the petitioner otherwise has a statutory remedy, I am of the view that it shall only appropriate to permit the petitioner to avail of such remedy. Accordingly, no action shall be taken by the municipality to implement the above order for a period of 15 days from date. 9. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case and if any statutory appeal is filed, the appropriate authority shall decide the same in accordance with law being uninfluenced by any of the observation made herein. 10. With the above direction and observation, the writ petition is disposed of. 11. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order if applied for, be given to the parties on priority basis upon completion of requisite formalities. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)