Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 45516 (CAL)

KALI PADA SASMAL v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/14117/2025 · 2026-09-29

Partha Sarathi Sen

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

29.09.2026 Sl. No. 33 (DL) Ct.No.19 (Susanta) (Bench I.D. 266052) WPA 14117 of 2025 Kali Pada Sasmal Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Raj Kumar Sain, … for the Petitioner. Ms. Indrani Chakraborty, Ld. AGP, Mr. Falguni Bandyopadhyay, Sr. Adv., Ms. Sarda Sha, …. For the State. Mr. Salil Kumar Maiti, Ms. Donal Samanta, … for the Respondent nos. 8 & 9. 1. Affidavit of service as filed today on behalf of the writ petitioner is taken on record. 2. On behalf of the respondent State a report dated 22.06.2026 is filed which is taken on record. 3. By filing the instant writ petition the writ petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ/writs against the respondent authority more specifically against the respondent no. 5 authority commanding him to remove the encroachment as made by the private respondents over the PWD land contiguous to the writ petitioner’s properties, particulars of which have been mentioned in paragraph 2 of the instant writ petition. 4. Learned advocate for the private respondents opposes the contention of the writ petitioner by saying that no encroachment has been made by the 2 private respondents and that the private respondents are carrying on business after obtaining proper license from the appropriate authority on their own rayati land. 5. On careful perusal of the report dated 22.06.2026 it appears to this Court that after filing of the instant writ petition, the respondent no. 5 authority after obtaining a demarcation report from the jurisdictional BL&LRO that is the respondent no. 6 authority issued a notice under Section 10(1) of the West Bengal Highways Act, 1964 against the private respondents asking them to remove the encroachment. 6. From the said report it reveals further that the said encroachers did not remove their encroachment and finding no other alternative, the respondent no. 5 authority has already approached under Section 10(2) of the said Act with the Sub-divisional Officer, Haldia. 7. In view of such, this Court while disposing of the instant writ petition directs the Sub-divisional Officer, Haldia to initiate a proceeding under Section 10(3) of the said act forthwith and after giving due opportunity of hearing of both the writ petitioner and the private respondents and also providing them all documents shall pass a reasoned order and shall forthwith communicate the same to the writ petitioner and the private respondents. 3 8. The entire exercise as indicated in the foregoing paragraph is to be completed by the Sub-divisional Officer, Haldia within 45 working days from the date of communication of the server copy of this order. 9. It is further directed that in the event in the said proceeding under Section 10(3), the Sub-divisional Officer, Haldia passes an order for removal of the encroachment and in the event such encroachment is not removed within the specified time he is directed to take all consequential action soon thereafter. 10. With the aforementioned observation WPA 14117 of 2025 is disposed of. (Partha Sarathi Sen, J.)