Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 41682 (CAL)

PROVAT KUMAR MITRA AND ORS. v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/25539/2026 · 2026-09-17

Raja Basu Chowdhury

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

17.09.2026 sayandeep Sl. No. 61 Ct. No. 03 WPA 25539 of 2026 Mr. Provat Kumar Mitra & ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & ors. Ms. Simantini Bhadra Ms. Ananya Das Ms. Atashi Naskar Ms. Debjani Sahu Banerjee …. for the petitioners Mr. Biswajit Mukherjee Mr. Bratin Kumar Dey ….. for the KMC Ms. Suchitra Sinha Chatterjee ….. for the State 1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the general direction issued by the municipality whereby the petitioner’s construction has been stalled on account of safety audit to be conducted by the municipal authorities. The learned advocate for the petitioners would submit that the municipal authorities have already issued a sanctioned building plan for construction of G+2 storied building at premises No. 46, Kanungo Park, Kolkata 700084. According to the petitioners, by reasons of the aforesaid impediment in carrying out further construction, the petitioners are suffering huge loss and the stacked construction materials are likely to get damaged. 2. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, I am of the view that if the municipality is interested to carry out any safety audit WPA 25539 of 2026 2 at the petitioners’ under construction building, the municipality is at liberty to do so. However, such safety audit, if any, should be conducted by the respondents within a period of 15 days from date and if the respondents find that there are no safety issues, the municipality must permit the petitioner to carry out construction in accordance with the sanctioned building plan upon due consideration of the petitioners’ representation dated 10th August, 2026 by passing a reasoned order. This decision must be rendered by the Municipal Commissioner. 3. The above direction has been issued on the premises there is a valid sanction plan and ordinarily without any just cause qua the petitioners, the construction cannot be brought to a halt. 4. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)