Prakash Chandra Maity @ Prakash Maity and Anr. Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Prakash Chandra Maity @ Prakash Maity and Anr. Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the Pradhan, Talagachhari-1 Gram Panchayat (3rd respondent) to consider and dispose of the petitioners' pending representation within six weeks from communication of the order, with reasonable opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioners and private respondents, in accordance with law; decision to be communicated within a week thereafter; concerned authority to take steps in accordance with law if any construction is found illegally/unauthorizedly raised; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the private respondents raised unauthorized construction without sanction from the concerned Panchayat, as alleged by the petitioners. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioners' representation is pending before the concerned authority, the court directed the Pradhan, Talagachhari-1 Gram Panchayat (third respondent) to consider and dispose of it within six weeks from communication of the order, affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioners and the private respondents, in accordance with law. Neither rival contention on sanction/unauthorized construction was adjudicated on merits.

Key takeaways

The decision taken by the authority shall be communicated to the parties within a week of the disposal.ratio¶¶14
If any construction is found to have been raised illegally/unauthorizedly, the concerned authority shall take necessary steps in accordance with law.ratio¶¶15
As no affidavit was invited, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted.obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WPA 18777 of 2024) by Prakash Chandra Maity @ Prakash Maity & Anr. alleging that the private respondents had raised unauthorized construction without sanction of the concerned Panchayat, and seeking consideration of a representation dated 10.06.2024 pending before the concerned authority. The private respondents countered that their construction was raised long back under a sanctioned building plan, and that in an earlier writ petition filed by them the present petitioners' own construction had been declared unauthorized with an undertaking to demolish, the present petition being retaliatory. The Panchayat was not represented despite service of notice. Without inviting affidavits and without deciding either contention, the court disposed of the petition directing the Pradhan, Talagachhari-1 Gram Panchayat (3rd respondent) to consider and dispose of the pending representation within six weeks from communication of the order upon affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to all concerned, in accordance with law; the decision to be communicated to the parties within a week thereof; and, if any construction is found raised illegally/unauthorizedly, the authority to take necessary steps in accordance with law. No order as to costs; allegations deemed not admitted.

54 21.04.2026 Ct. No.15 b.das

WPA 18777 of 2024

Prakash Chandra Maity @ Prakash Maity & Anr. Vs. The State of W. B. & Ors.

Mr. Soumen Kr. Dutta Mr. Sabyasachi Bhattacharjee …for the petitioners.

Mr. Ranjit Rajak …for the State. Mr. Manoranjan Jana …for respondent no.8.

The Panchayat is not represented despite service of notice.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the private respondents have raised unauthorized construction without sanction from the concerned Panchayat. The petitioners submitted a representation before the concerned authority on 10^th June, 2024 and seek consideration of the same.

Opposing such allegation, learned counsel for the private respondents submits that the private respondents have raised construction long back upon obtaining sanctioned building plan from the concerned Panchayat.

In an earlier writ petition filed by the private respondents, construction raised by the petitioners has been declared to be unauthorized and the petitioners have undertaken to demolish the said construction. In

2

retaliation, the present writ petition has been filed on false grounds.

The alleged illegal construction raised by the petitioners has no nexus with the allegation made in the present application.

Since the representation submitted by the petitioners is pending before the concerned authority, the Pradhan, Talagachhari-1 Gram Panchayat, being the 3^rd respondent herein, is directed to consider and dispose of the same within six weeks from the date of communication of this order upon affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioner and the private respondents, in accordance with law.

The decision taken by the authority shall be communicated to the parties within a week thereof.

In the event any of the construction is found to have been raised illegally/unauthorizedly, the concerned authority shall take necessary steps in accordance with law.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted.

Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)