Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 41985 (CAL)

DALU SHEKH @ SK. MUJIBAR v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/11225/2026 · 2026-09-21

Suvra Ghosh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

39 2211..0099..22002266 Ct. No.15 b.das WPA 11225 of 2026 Dalu Shekh @ Sk. Mujibar Vs. The State of W.B. & Ors. Mr. Goutam Kumar Hazra Mr. S. S. Hazra …for the petitioner. Ms. Pampa Dey (Dhabal)…for the respondent no.9. Mr. Madhu Jana Ms. Puja Sonkar …for the State. The petitioner is a beneficiary of Banglar Awas Yojana Scheme and was granted permission to raise construction in the plot in question owned by him. An amount of Rs.60,000/- was also transferred to his bank account by the concerned authority. He applied for conversion of the land from ‘Sali’ to ‘Bastu’ which is pending. The construction has commenced. The private respondent approached this Court in a writ petition being WPA 11024 of 2025 alleging unauthorized construction being raised by the petitioner. By an order passed on 24th July, 2025, this Court directed the Pradhan, Galsi Gram Panchayat to consider and dispose of the representation submitted by the private respondent herein within a stipulated time frame upon following certain procedures. 2 In compliance with the said order, the Pradhan issued notice of hearing upon the parties and upon hearing both the parties passed an order on 2nd March, 2026 wherein the construction raised by the petitioner was held to be unauthorized and without a sanctioned building plan. The petitioner was directed to demolish the same within 15 days from the date of communication of the order. The order was sent to the Sub-Divisional Officer by the Pradhan. Since no further step was taken by the Sub- Divisional Officer, the private respondent approached this Court in a writ being WPA 25648 of 2026. By an order passed on 16th September, 2026, this Court directed the Sub-Divisional Officer to deal with the issue in terms of Section 23(5) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973 and take a reasoned decision within four weeks from the date of communication of the order. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has submitted a representation before the Pradhan on 1st April, 2026 seeking recalling/cancellation of the order dated 2nd March, 2026. The petitioner seeks consideration of the said representation. Learned counsel for the private respondent submits that since the issue is pending before the Sub-Divisional Officer in terms of the order passed by this Court earlier, the matter may be directed to be dealt with by the Sub- Divisional Officer. 3 It appears that the order passed by the Pradhan on 2nd March, 2026 declaring construction raised by the petitioner to be illegal/unauthorized has not been assailed by the petitioner before the appropriate forum. Since the issue is under consideration of the Sub-Divisional Officer in terms of the order passed by this Court on 16th September, 2026, the petitioner shall be granted an opportunity of hearing before the Sub-Divisional Officer under Section 23(5) of the Act of 1973 and is at liberty to place his contention before the said authority at the time of hearing. Since the issue has already been dealt with by this Court earlier, the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted. Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Suvra Ghosh, J.)