Item.36 16.09.2026 ssi Ct. 3 WPA 16834 of 2026 Siboprosad Sanyal. -vs- The State of West Bengal & others. Ms. Pompy Bose Mr. Abhijit Sarkar Mr. Raja Biswas …for the petitioner Mr Achintya Kr. Banerjee Ms. Indumouli Banerjee Mr. Adhip Narayan Banerjee …for the Municipality Mr. Kallol Basu Mr. Samik Sarkar Ms. Shreejita Sen …for the o.p.nos. 9,10 1. The instant writ petition has been filed complaining unauthorized construction of a five storied building at holding No. 41. D.N.Banerjee Lane, Ward No. 6, Dey Choudhury Street, J.L. No. 155, Mouza and Municipality Ranaghat at the instance of the private respondents and the failure on the part of the municipal authorities to take steps. 2. On 20.08.2026, when the matter was taken up for consideration, though by way of a belated disclosure, the enquiry report was placed before WPA 16834 of 2026 2 this Court by the advocate for the municipality. Such fact has been recorded in the order dated 22nd August, 2026. Since it would transpire that the Municipality had come to a prima facie conclusion that the building is still under construction and though the private respondent applied for completion certificate, the municipal authorities had not issued the same and further noting that the sanction was for construction of G+3 storied building and in place thereof, G+4 storied building has come up, this Court by order dated 20th August 2026 had directed that no further construction shall take place at the locale and the Officer in Charge of the jurisdictional police station was directed to ensure compliance of the same. The matter has since come up for final consideration. The private respondent nos. 9 and 10 both have filed an exception to the report filed by the Municipality. The petitioner has also filed a response. 3. The Municipality is represented. 4. Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate appearing for the Municipality would submit having regard to the submissions made and the stand taken by the private respondents, the Municipality should be permitted to revisit the inspection report. 5. Mr. Banerjee goes on further to add, the WPA 16834 of 2026 3 Municipality should be directed to revisit the entire matters in so far as the unauthorized construction is concerned. 6. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, this Court finds that the stand taken by the learned advocate for the Municipality is not supported by any report from the Municipality. In the peculiar facts noting that the prima facie findings has already been rendered by the Municipality, this Court is of the considered view that the Municipal Authority should immediately proceed and take appropriate action in terms of the appropriate provisions of Section 218 of the West Bengal Municipal Act 1993. It is, however, made clear that the report filed by the Municipality is only prima facie. The parties shall be at liberty to take exception to the report before the appropriate authority in accordance with law. The authority shall bring the proceeding to a logical conclusion in accordance with law within a period of ten weeks from the date of communication of this order. Board of Councilors or the Administrator of the Municipality as the case may be, if it consider fit, having regard to the exception already filed by the respondent nos. 9 -10, a further inspection may be made upon prior notice to the parties by recording reasons for the same. The inspection WPA 16834 of 2026 4 report must be circulated to the parties. 7. With these observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)