Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6503 (CAL)

RITESH KUMAR JAISWAL v. HOWRAH MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.

WPA/1229/2025 · 2026-01-13

Raja Basu Chowdhury

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

13.01.2026 Ct. 3 Item No. ML 90 sayandeep WPA 1229 of 2025 Ritesh Kumar Jaiswal Versus The HMC & Ors. Mr. Prasenjit Burman Ms. Payel Koley Mr. Swapnesh Mallik …. For the petitioners Mr. Sandipan Banerjee Mr. Ankit Sureka ….for the HMC Mr. Rabindra Nath Pal Mr. Suman Singh ….for the State 1. The affidavit-of-service filed in Court today is taken on record. 2. Complaining illegal construction at the behest of the private respondent No. 6 and the failure on the part of the municipal authorities to take appropriate action on the basis of the petitioner’s complaints dated 11th September, 2024 and 2nd January, 2025, the instant writ petition has been filed. 3. Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate appears for the municipality. He submits on the basis of oral instruction that though there is a sanction building plan for construction of G+2 storied building at premises No. 198/2, Aswani Kaur Mondal Road, P.S. Bantra, Howrah, PIN-711101, however, the private respondent has already carried out illegal WPA 1229 of 2025 2 construction thereat and the G+2 storied building has become a G+5 storied building. According to him, a stop work notice has already been issued though no copies thereof could be placed before this Court. He submits that appropriate proceeding has already been initiated by the municipal authorities. Although the private respondent is not represented in Court, I am of the view that taking into consideration the submissions of the parties, it would only be appropriate to direct the municipal authorities to take appropriate steps in accordance with law under the provisions of Section 177 of the HMC Act, 1980 by notifying the person responsible and to initiate such proceedings if such proceedings have already not been initiated within a period of 2 weeks from the date of communication of this order. The proceedings must be brought to a logical conclusion within 8 weeks thereafter in accordance with law. 4. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)