Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 40899 (CAL)

SK. SABER ALI v. THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER AND ORS.

WPA/24294/2024 · 2026-09-15

Raja Basu Chowdhury

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

15.09.2026 sayandeep Sl. No. ML 13 Ct. No. 03 WPA 24294 of 2024 Sk. Saber Ali Vs. The Municipal Commissioner, KMC & ors. Mr. Debashis Sinha Mr. Rishav Ray Mr. Aditiya Mukherjee Mr. Swarnava Majumder …. for the petitioner Ms. Manisha Nath ….. for the KMC Mr. Biswaranjan Bhakat ….. for the State 1. The affidavit-of-service filed in Court today is taken on record. 2. Despite service, though the respondents are not represented, however, since Ms. Nath learned advocate who usually appears on behalf of the KMC is present in Court, she is directed to appear on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Let her appointment be regularized. 3. Since the State is also not represented and since Mr. Bhakat, learned advocate who usually appears for the State is present in Court, he is directed to appear on behalf of the State. Let his appointment be also regularized. 4. The present writ petition has been filed complaining illegal and unauthorized construction at the premises No. B/2A/H/5, Tiljala Lane, KMC, Ward No. 65, P.S. Karaya, Kolkata-700019 (hereinafter referred to as WPA 24294 of 2024 2 the said property). The petitioner claims to have entered into an agreement for purchase of a the flat in the building to be constructed on the said property. According to the petitioner, though the sanction was for construction of a G+2 storied building, the construction having been raised to a G+5 storied building, the petitioner has backed out. 5. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and noting that a complaint has already been lodged by the petitioner before the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3, I am of the view, it shall be appropriate at this stage to direct the municipal authorities to carry out an inspection at the locale and take a decision on the petitioner’s complaint by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law by providing appropriate opportunity of hearing to the interested parties. 6. It is expected that a decision in this regard shall be taken within a period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of this order. 7. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)