22.09.2026 sayandeep Sl. No. 36 Ct. No. 03 WPA 23687 of 2026 Rohit Roy Vs. The State of West Bengal & ors. Mr. Loknath Ghosh Mr. Aniket Kanrar …. For the petitioner Mr. Susanta Dutta Ms. Kakoli Dutta …. For the State Mr. Sandipan Das …. For the HMC Mr. Gourav Das …. For the respondent Nos. 2-3 Mr. Prantik Sarkar …. For the respondent No.9 Mr. D. Chatterjee …. For the respondent No. 10 1. Alleging illegal construction at the behest of the respondent No. 10, the instant writ petition has been filed. It is stated that though the construction in respect of the premises No. 144/1 Grand Trunk Road, P.O. Salkia, P.S. Malipanchghora, Howrah-711106 was sanctioned for a G+2 storied building, the same has proceeded up to G+5 storied building. 2. The State, respondent No. 9 and HMC are represented. 3. The learned advocate for the respondent No. 9 has placed before this Court the complaint lodged by the respondent No. 9 before the Commissioner of HMC as regards the illegal and unauthorized construction. A response under Right to Information Act has also been produced wherefrom it would transpire that the sanctioned plan is only for G+2 storied building. WPA 23687 of 2026 2 4. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and since, prima facie, from the materials on record including the response filed by the Assistant Engineer, HMC dated 22nd July, 2026, it would transpire that the sanction is only in respect of a G+2 storied building, I am of the view that municipality must carry out an inspection at the locale and if, on the basis of inspection to be carried out by them, any illegal construction is noted, appropriate proceedings must be initiated under Section 177(1) of the HMC Act, 1980 and the same must be brought to a logical conclusion on an expeditious basis preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of this order. 5. If on the other hand, the municipality is of the view, no illegal construction has taken place, in such case, the inspection report must be circulated to the contesting parties and a reasoned decision must be taken and communicated to the parties. 6. Since, the municipality is not represented, Mr. Sandipan Das learned advocate who usually appears for the HMC, is directed to appear in the matter. Let his appointment be regularized. 7. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)