16 23.09.2026 sb Ct.3. IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA 24103 of 2026 Yunus Ali Biswas Versus Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation & Ors. With WPA 4124 of 2026 Sabina Biswas Versus Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation & Ors. Mr. Samit Bhanja Mr. Arkadipta Sengupta Mr. Arka Roy Ms. Ankita Ghosh … For the petitioner in WPA 24103 of 2026 Mr. Anish Kumar Mukherjee Ms. Jayita Dhar Chakraborty … For the municipality. Mr. Asif Hussain Mr. Akash Ghosh Ms. Nabanita Chakraborty … For the respondent no.5 in WPA 24103 of 2026 In Re: WPA 24103 of 2026 1. Complaining unauthorized and illegal construction at the behest of the private respondent no.5 in respect of R.S. & L.R Dag No. 82, L.R. Khatian No. 836, Mouza – Aghara, J.L. No. 10 P.S. Rajarhat (now Bidhannagar North), District – North 24 Parganas (hereinafter referred to as the said property) and the failure on the part of the municipality to take appropriate steps, the instant writ petition has been filed. 2 WPA 24103 of 2026 with WPA 4124 of 2026 2. The municipality is represented and would submit that the municipality has already served stop work notice on Mr. Laxman Jaiswal (Owner and Developer) and it was noted that the construction that was carried out was without sanctioned building plan. 3. Mr. Hussain, learned advocate appears on behalf of the respondent no.5. He submits that the private respondent has purchased the said property and has a building permit. In support of his contention he has also disclosed a plan duly sanctioned by the Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation, being Bidhannagar building permit dated 9th March, 2026. 4. Having regard to the above disclosure this Court finds it surprising to note that notwithstanding the above, the Executive Engineer (I.C) Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation has purported to issue stop work notice dated 15th July, 2026. 5. Be that as it may, considering the present disclosure made by the respondent no. 5, I am of the view that there is no scope to accept the petitioner’s contention. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of by directing the municipality to decide on the stop work notice on the basis of the sanctioned building plan disclosed by the respondent no.5 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of five working days from the date of communication of this order. 3 WPA 24103 of 2026 with WPA 4124 of 2026 7. Insofar as the writ petition filed by Sabina Biswas, being WPA 4124 of 2026 is concerned, the said writ petition also concerns the selfsame property, however, in absence of the writ petitioner, this Court is not inclined to decide on the said cause and the writ petition accordingly stands dismissed for default. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for be given to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)