09.09.2026 Item No.26 AP/pk WPA 17748 of 2024 Kalpana Dutta @ Swapna Chanda Vs. The State of West Bengal and Ors. Mr. Sahid Uddin Ahmed … For the Petitioner. Mr. Partha Chakraborty Ms. Sneha Chatterjee … For the State. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging that his brother Amal Chandra Chanda being private respondent No.5, is the son of Late Sishubala Chanda (Mother), who died leaving behind land measuring 2 Cottahs 13 Chattaks with pucca structure lying and situated at Mouza: Patuli, J.L. No.29, E.P. No.227, C.S. Plot No.11(P) now premises No.A/53, Rabindra Pally (35, Rabindra Pally), P.O.: Baghajatin, P.S.- Patuli, Kolkata: 700086. 2. It is stated by the writ petitioner that late Sishubala Chanda died intestate leaving behind the petitioner and the respondent No.5. The father pre- deceased the mother of the petitioner. 3. It is further contended in the writ petition that the respondent No.5 has surreptitiously and without informing the petitioner has caused his name mutated as the sole legal heir of the said property in exclusion of the petitioner. 2 4. She relies on a letter dated 24th June, 2024 addressed to the Officer-in-Charge, Patuli Police Station where the petitioner has complained of such illegal mutation of the property. On the basis of such complaint the instant writ petition was filed, inter alia, praying for appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus against the respondent Nos.4 & 5 to consider their representation dated 24th June, 2024 and to also register a First Information Report against the respondent Nos.4 and 5 on the basis of the complaint dated 24th June, 2024. 5. A report was called for from the State. 6. The State appears and filed a report dated 22nd June, 2026, which is taken on record. 7. It appears that there was a civil suit pending between the parties, which has since been withdrawn. 8. Learned advocate for the petitioner also relies upon a supplementary affidavit filed before this Court. It appears that the respondent no. 5 has got his name mutated on strength of an affidavit before the First Class Magistrate claiming himself to be the sole legal heir. 9. It appears to this Court that the grievances of the writ petitioners against the private respondent no. 5 can be appropriately ventilated in appropriately instituted criminal proceeding. 3 10. This writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioners to file an appropriate complaint before the locale police station if the petitioners are aggrieved by any alleged criminal offence by the private respondent. 11. It is, however, clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the allegation that the petitioners have made against the private respondent or on the authenticity of contents of the affidavit so affirmed by the private respondent. 12. This Court has also commented on the mutation that has been ordered by the Corporation clearing all the issues to be agitated at an appropriate forum without any order as to costs. 13. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Anuj Singh, J.)