Item No.11 30.09.2026 Court. No. 12 GB MAT 1602 of 2026 With CAN 1 of 2026 Abhishek Pandey Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee, Mr. Rishabh Ahmed Khan … for the Appellant. Mr. Kumar Mishra, Ld. AGP., Mr. Madhu Jana, Ms. Puja Sonkar … for the State. Mr. Debabrata Ray … for the Respondent No.4. Mr. Raj Kumar Sain … for the Respondent No.6. 1. Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today, is taken on record. 2. This appeal arises out of an order dated September 14, 2026, passed in WPA 15289 of 2026. By the order impugned the learned Judge held that no sanction was required for raising a boundary wall and, as such, the stop work notice issued to the writ petitioner/ respondent, was illegal. Reference was made to the decision of a coordinate Bench in the matter of Tapan Kumar Dutta & Ors. versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. reported in 2016 SCC OnLine Cal 5044. 3. Her Lordship relied on Rule 19(3) of the West Bengal Panchayat (Gram Panchayat Administration) Rules, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘said Rules’) and held that unless the boundary wall was made of brick and the bounded area was likely to be used as a 2 stockyard or for any commercial or institutional purpose either on open space or by erecting a temporary shed, permission for construction of such boundary wall was not required. The stop work notice which was also a notice directing the writ petitioner to show cause as to why steps should not be taken, was set aside by Her Lordship. 4. Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate for the appellant submits that the issue was not with regard to erection of a boundary wall on a private land. The issue raised by the appellant before the panchayat authorities was with regard to construction of a boundary wall by the writ petitioner alongside a village road without leaving spaces. The villagers had decided to leave space from their respective lands for construction of a village road. At this juncture, the writ petitioner started raising a boundary wall without leaving such space. 5. Mr. Sain, learned advocate for the writ petitioner submits that the boundary wall was being constructed on the exclusive private land of the writ petitioner and the law did not require permission. The bounded area was not to be used as a stockyard or for any commercial or institutional purpose. As such, the gram panchayat did not have any authority under the law to stop the said construction and issue a notice to initiate proceedings under the provisions of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973. 6. The issue here is beyond the applicability of Rule 19(3) of the said Rules. The issue in our, prima facie, view is with regard to Rule 21(2). Rule 21 is quoted below:- 3 “21. Approach road or passage for building. – (1) With effect from such date, and with respect to such Gram or Grams, as may be specified by the State Government by notification, every structure or building shall have an approach road or passage from a public road and the minimum width of such passage or road shall be one and eight-tenth meters. (2) If an existing passage or road over which the public have a right of way, is less than one and eight-tenth meters wide, the plot-holders on either side of such passage or road shall keep a front set-back in such manner as to allow a front set-back of nine-tenth meter on either side of the road after leaving in the middle a clear passage of one and eight-tenth meters and a rear set back of one and eight- tenth meter: Provided that if a Gram Panchayat is of the opinion that an existing building or part thereof should be set-back to allow a regular passage or road of not less than one eight-tenth meters in pursuance of any development plan, the Gram Panchayat, after giving the owner of such building an opportunity of being heard, may refer a proposal through the Panchayat Samiti to the Land Acquisition Collector for acquisition of the land in question: Provided that when the plot holders on either side of an approach passage or road allow front set-back in such manner that on leaving a front set-back of nine-tenth meter in front of each house along the passage, a continuous width of five meters for the passage or road is obtained, such passage or road may be taken over and maintained by the Gram Panchayat. (3) Whenever there is a service road or approach passage available, no direct access 4 from a building shall be permitted to a public road.” 7. On a bare perusal of the complaint made by the appellant before the gram panchayat, we find that they have tried to make out a case that the village road lacked adequate space for access by heavy vehicles, ambulance, fire brigades, etc. and the villagers had decided to leave side spaces for the construction of a village road. Such contention alligns with the provisions of Rule 21 of the said Rules. 8. In any event, we are not in a position to decide the correctness of the allegations made by the appellant and the contentions of the writ petitioner, but the authority under the Panchayat Act, that is, the gram panchayat can revisit this issue and decide on the allegation made. Only because the writ petitioner has been asked to answer a query, that does not mean that a decision has been taken against the construction. The panchayat was merely trying to look into the legality of the allegation made and the construction of the wall which was being raised. Moreover, as the boundary wall was being constructed on ‘Danga’ land, such issue should also be looked into. The issues will be decided by the gram panchayat within a period of two months from the date of communication of this order and all parties will be given a hearing and before such hearing, inspection of the affected area should be made in the presence of all parties. We have not made any observation on the merit of the claims and counter- claims of the parties. The order impugned is set aside. 5 9. Accordingly, the appeal and the application are disposed of. 10. Parties are directed to act on the basis of the server copy of this order. (Shampa Sarkar, J.) (Arjun Ray Mukherjee, J.)