Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 45441 (CAL)

SANJEEV CHAKRABORTY AND ANR v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/28026/2026 · 2026-09-30

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 30.09.26 Item No.25 Sws.M WPA 28026 of 2026 Sanjeev Chakraborty & Anr. Vs The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Sarbananda Sanyal Mr. Samrat Chakraborty …for the petitioners Mr. Siddhartha Sankar Roy Mr. Pratap Kumar Yadav …for the State Mr. Sani Hossain …for the respondent Nos.6, 8,10-18 Ms. Salma S. Shah …for the respondent No. 9 1. The writ petitioner, the respondent/State and the private respondents are represented by their respective learned counsel. 2. The subject matter of the instant writ petition is the Memo No. 471/M-64G dated 24.09.2026 as issued by the respondent No. 4/authority whereby and whereunder a notice was given to the writ petitioners that the order of the respondent No. 3/authority as passed in a proceeding under Section 10(3) of the West Bengal Highways Act, 1964 (the said Act in short) would be executed on 30.09.2026 at 12 o’clock noon. 3. At the time of hearing, Mr. Sanyal, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners candidly submits before this Court that despite pendency of 2 the instant writ petition, the respondent No. 4/authority has demolished the alleged encroachment. It is further contended by Mr. Sanyal that in paragraph 11 of the instant writ petition it has been specifically pleaded by the writ petitioners that the order dated 27.08.2026 as passed by the respondent No. 3/authority was never communicated to the writ petitioners, which is, however, disputed by the learned advocate for the respondent/State. 4. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the private respondents submits before this Court that since the demolition process has already been concluded, nothing remains to be decided in the instant writ petition and on that score the instant writ petition may be dismissed. 5. On careful perusal of the entire materials as placed before this Court and after hearing learned advocates for the contending parties, this Court considers that the right to prefer an appeal under Section 10(4) of the said Act still survives with the writ petitioners, especially when it is the specific case of the writ petitioners that the order dated 27.08.2026 as passed by the respondent No. 3/authority in a proceeding under Section 10(3) of the said Act was not communicated to the writ petitioners. 3 6. 3 6. In view of such, this Court while disposing the instant writ petition permits the writ petitioners to prefer an appeal under Section 10(4) of the said Act before the jurisdictional District Magistrate and in the event such appeal is filed within 30 working days from today, the jurisdictional District Magistrate shall dispose of the appeal positively within 30 working days from the date of presentation of the memo of appeal before him. It is needless to mention that such appeal is to be disposed of by the jurisdictional District Magistrate after giving due opportunity of hearing both the writ petitioners and the private respondents. 7. The time limits as fixed by this Court are peremptory and mandatory. 8. Liberty is given to the learned advocate-on-record for the petitioners to communicate the server copy of this order to the jurisdictional District Magistrate, who is directed to act on the server copy of this order. 9. The respondent No. 6/authority is hereby directed to ensure that no further encroachment is made over the LR Plot No. 5658 in Mouza-Pandua, District- Hooghly, unless permitted by the competent authority. 10. With the aforementioned observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of. 4 11. Before parting with, it is further directed that in the event the present writ petitioners succeeds in the said appeal as would be preferred under Section 10(4) of the said Act, the jurisdictional District Magistrate shall also consider the quantum of compensation on account of alleged loss suffered by the present writ petitioners due to the demolition as carried in terms of the impugned memo dated 24.09.2026. 12. 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.)