Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 44624 (CAL)

PRADIP KUMAR DINGAL v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/7084/2026 · 2026-09-28

Partha Sarathi Sen

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Ct.19 28.09.26 Item No.57 Sws.M WPA 7084 of 2026 Pradip Kumar Dingal Vs The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Biswajit Sau Mr. Souhom Sau …for the petitioner Mr. Snehasish Sutradhar Mr. Avimanya Roy Chowdhury ….for the State 1. The affidavit of service as filed today on behalf of the writ petitioner, is taken on record. None appears on behalf of the private respondents despite service. However, learned advocate for the writ petitioner and the learned advocate for the respondent/State are present. 2. By filing the instant writ petition, the petitioner prayed for issuance of appropriate writ/writs against the respondent authorities, more specifically against the respondent No. 4/authority commanding him to remove the illegal encroachment as allegedly made by the private respondents over the PWD road adjacent to the writ petitioner’s land, particulars of which has been mentioned in paragraph 2 of the instant writ petition. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the writ petitioner that on account of such alleged illegal construction on the 2 PWD road at the instance of the private respondents, the petitioner’s access to the aforementioned property has been restricted and thus finding no other alternative the writ petitioner submitted a representation dated 25.02.2026 with the respondent/authority, but in vain. 4. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent/State submits before this Court that a report is required to be obtained from the appropriate authority of the State as to whether at all any encroachment has been made over the PWD road or not. 5. On careful perusal of the entire materials as placed before this Court and after hearing learned advocates for the contending parties this Court while disposing the instant writ petition passes the following directions: (a) The jurisdictional BL& LRO is directed to make a field verification at the disputed plot after giving prior notice to the writ petitioner and the private respondents and shall prepare a demarcation report and shall submit the same to the respondent No. 4/authority positively within thirty working days from the date of communication of the server copy of this order. 3 (b) The respondent No. 4/authority on receipt of the demarcation report from the jurisdictional BL&LOR shall cause notice to the writ petitioner and the private respondents and shall provide them the copies of the said demarcation report. (c) The respondent No. 4/authority is further directed to consider the representation dated 25.02.2026 in accordance with law as well as in the light of the demarcation report as would be submitted by the jurisdictional BL&LRO and after giving fair chance of hearing both to the writ petitioner and the private respondents, shall pass a reasoned order and shall forthwith communicate the same to the writ petitioner and the private respondents. (d) The entire exercise, as indicated in the foregoing paragraphs shall have to be completed by the respondent No. 4/authority positively within 45 working days from the date of receipt of the demarcation report/field verification report from the jurisdictional BL&LRO. 4 (e) The time limits, as fixed by this Court, are peremptory and mandatory. (f) It is further directed that in the event, while passing the reasoned order on the representation dated 25.02.2026, the respondent No. 4/authority finds sufficient merit in such representation, he is directed to take consequential action soon thereafter. 6. With the aforementioned observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of. 7. Before parting with, it is, however, made clear that while disposing the instant writ petition, this Court has not gone into the merits of the representation dated 25.02.2026 and thus all points are kept open for adjudication by the respondent No. 4/authority. 8. Liberty is given to the learned advocate-on-record for the writ petitioner to communicate the server copy of this order to the respondent No. 4/authority as well as the jurisdictional BL&LRO, who are directed to act on the server copy of this order. 9. Urgent Photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all the necessary formalities. (Partha Sarathi Sen , J.)