1 M/L 48 21.09.2026 Rohit,A.R.(Ct.) ct.no.3 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA 29583 of 2024 Faqruddin Ali Ahmed Mondal Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Ms. Pampa Dey …for the Petitioner Mr. Raghunath Chakraborty Mr. Rahul Singh Ms. Dipanwita Das …for the Maheshtala Municipality 1. These two writ petitions are taken up for analogous hearing with the consent of both the parties. IN RE: WPA 29583 OF 2024 2. Complaining illegal construction at Dag No. 1419, 1420 and 1421 of Mouza- Panchur J.L No. 03, Block- Maheshtala, Ward No. 08 under the Police Station- Rabindranagar, Maheshtala Municipality in the District- South 24 Parganas, and the failure on the part of the municipal authorities to take appropriate steps, the instant writ petition has been filed. 3. Although, the matter was heard from time to time, today the learned Advocate for the petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit in Court, the same is taken on record. 2 4. By relying on the supplementary affidavit Ms. Dey, learned Advocate has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 28th February, 2025 in connection with a proceeding before the municipality on the basis of the complaint lodged by the petitioner wherefrom it would transpire that the municipality had been inquiring into the complaint made by the petitioner regarding illegal conversion of water body. According to her the municipality has already arrived at a unanimous decision that the opposite parties therein were under an obligation to restore the water bodies in respect of plot no. 1078, 1079, 1421, 1420 and 1419 of Mouza- Panchu, J.L. No.3 and the work should be completed within two months from such date. Since the above order is yet to be complied with, the municipality should be directed to enforce the above order. 5. Though the State is not represented. However, the learned Advocate for the municipality is represented. 6. Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and noting from the disclosure made by the State in the form of information on the record of rights, it would transpire that in so far as plot no. 1419 is concerned though the same is recorded under different khatians the character 3 of the said land is ‘bastu’ and ‘danga’. As such, in the peculiar facts this Court is not inclined to interfere in so far as plot no. 1419 is concerned as the same would tantamount to interfering with the record of rights. 7. If the petitioner is aggrieved with the preparation of the record of rights, the petitioner is at liberty to proceed before the appropriate authority in accordance with law. 8. In so far as the other plots are concerned unless the record of rights shows otherwise the municipality shall proceed in accordance with law and enforce its order dated 28th February, 2025 within a reasonable time on an expeditious basis. 9. With the aforesaid observations W.P.A 29583 of 2024 stands disposed of. 10. There shall be no order as to costs. 11. Urgent Photostat website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. IN RE : WPA 20935 OF 2025 12. In so far as the aforesaid writ petition is concerned though the petitioner seeks demolition of the structure constructed on wet land, I am of the view, the municipality should consider the representation made by the petitioner on 12th 4 August, 2024 and take a decision thereon in accordance with law. It is made clear that while deciding on the representation the municipality should render its findings based on the record of rights by affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the interested parties. 13. The above decision be taken within three months from the date of communication of this order. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)