SUSANTA KUMAR GUCHAIT v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.
WPA/25135/2026 · 2026-09-29
Saugata Bhattacharyya
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 44025 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 44025 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
32 2299..0099..22002266 Ct. No. 05
adeb
WPA 25135 of 2026
Susanta Kumar Guchait Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Golam Mostafa
Mr. T. S. Samanta
Mr. Surajit Maity
Mr. Kazi Asif Iqbal
…for the petitioner
Mr. Lutful Haque
Sk. Mustak Ali
Ms. Taharima Khatun
…for the respondent nos. 5 & 6
Mr. Udayan Chakraborty
Mr. Vivekananda Sinha Roy
….for the State
1. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of petitioner is taken on record.
2. By presenting this writ petition direction is prayed for upon the concerned police authorities to take steps which would permit the petitioner to enjoy possession of particular piece of land. It is submitted that structure was made on the said piece of land which was damaged by the respondents.
3. Learned advocate representing State respondents and respondent nos. 5 and 6 have opposed this writ petition.
4. On behalf of respondent nos. 5 and 6 it is submitted that no disturbance was made by respondent nos. 5 and 6 in enjoying peaceful
2 possession over the piece of land in question which is claimed by petitioner. It is submitted that concerned Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Nandigram-II inspected the land in question to set up health centre.
5. On behalf of State respondents communication dated 22nd September, 2026 of Inspector-in- Charge, Nandigram Police Station is filed and same is taken on record. It is disclosed in communication that land in question is vested land which is selected by the Government authorities to set up health centre.
6. In view of respective submissions made on behalf of parties it appears that dispute is concerning right over a plot of land in question. If petitioner finds that his right to enjoy the possession of land is disturbed in that event petitioner needs to approach appropriate forum for redressal of grievance.
7. Police authority is not the appropriate authority to decide right of petitioner over the land in question.
8. Hence, present writ petition is not interfered with and same stands dismissed.
9. However, this order shall not preclude the petitioner to take steps in accordance with law, if so advised.
3
10. Parties to act on server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)