IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Ct.19 22.09.26 Item No.24 Sws.M WPA 28034 of 2024 Sukumar Maji Vs State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Debasis Sur Mr. Amitava Chowdhury Mr. Tarak Nath Sarkar …for the petitioner Ms. Jayita Dhar Chakraborty, Jr. Govt. Adv. Mr. Nilanjan Pal Mr. Saikat Dey ….for the State 1. The affidavit of service as filed today on behalf of the writ petitioner, is taken on record. 2. None appears on behalf of the private respondent, despite service. 3. By filing the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate Writ/Writs against the respondent/authorities, commanding them to take appropriate step against the private respondent by way of removing the encroachment as made by him over the PWD land. 4. At the time of hearing, Mr. Amitava Chowdhury, learned advocate duly led by Mr. Debasis Sur, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner submits before this Court that it is the specific case of the writ petitioner that he is the 2 owner of a portion of LR Plot No. 49, particulars of which has been mentioned in paragraph 2 of the instant writ petition. It is submitted that contiguous to the aforementioned raiyati land of the writ petitioner, there lies a road belonging to the PWD, which is known as Ashari to Trilochanpur main road. It is submitted that it is the case of the writ petitioner that on account of illegal encroachment of the private respondent over such PWD’s land, the writ petitioner is facing extreme difficulty to use his own land, particulars of which has been mentioned in paragraph 2 of the instant writ petition. 5. Drawing attention to page No. 32 of the instant writ petition, being a copy of the representation dated 24.07.2024, it is submitted that despite submission of such representation, no action has been taken by the respondent No. 7/authority, who is competent to remove such encroachment. 6. It is thus submitted that appropriate relief/reliefs may be granted to the writ petitioner in accordance with law. 7. Ms. Jayita Dhar Chakraborty, learned advocate duly assisted by Mr. Nilanjan Pal, learned advocate in their usual fairness submits before this Court that the respondent No. 7/authority may be directed to consider the representation dated 24.07.2024 as 3 submitted by the writ petitioner in accordance with law. 8. In view of such, this Court while disposing the writ petition directs the respondent No. 9/authority to make a field verification at the disputed plot after giving prior notice to the writ petitioner and the private respondent and shall submit a demarcation report and/or field verification report with the respondent No. 7/authority, positively within thirty working days from the date of communication of the server copy of this order. 9. The respondent No. 7/authority on receipt of such demarcation report from the respondent No. 9/authority shall give notice to the writ petitioner and the private respondent No. 12 and shall provide them copies of the said demarcation report as would be submitted by the respondent No. 9/authority. 10. The respondent No. 7/authority is further directed to consider the representation dated 24.07.2024, as submitted by the writ petitioner in accordance with law and in the light of demarcation report as would be submitted by the respondent No. 9/authority and after giving due opportunity of hearing both to the writ petitioner and the private respondent No. 12 and/or their authorized representative, shall pass a reasoned order forthwith and shall communicate the same both to the writ petitioner and the private 4 respondent No. 12 preferably through e-mail, in the event e-mail details of the writ petitioner and the private respondent No. 12 are provided to him at the time of hearing. 11. The entire exercise, as indicated in the foregoing paragraphs shall have to be completed by the respondent No. 7/authority positively within 60 working days from the date of receipt of the demarcation report and/or field verification report from the respondent No. 9/authority. 12. The time limits as fixed by this Court are peremptory and mandatory. 13. Liberty is given to the learned advocate-on-record for the writ petitioner to communicate the server copy of this order both to the respondent No. 7 and 9/authorities, who are directed to act on the server copy of this order. 14. It is further directed that in the event while passing the reasoned order, the respondent No. 7 finds sufficient merit in the representation dated 24.07.2024, he is directed to take all consequential actions soon thereafter. 15. With the aforementioned observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of. 16. Before parting with this writ petition, it is made clear that this Court while disposing the instant writ petition has not gone into the merits of the 5 representation dated 24.07.2024 as submitted by the writ petitioner and thus all points are kept open for adjudication by the respondent No. 7/authority. 17. Urgent Photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all the necessary formalities. (Partha Sarathi Sen , J.)