Disposed¶20

Kamales Ghosh v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC9 Jun 2026WPA/10905/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Encroachment on Government land; obstruction of ingress and egress; demarcation through competent Amins/Surveyors; direction to SDO, Krishnagar Sub-Division (Sadar); representation dated February 11, 2026; 8-week compliance timeline; plot No.57, Mouza-par Chandannagar, J.L. No.36, District Nadia; WPA 10905 of 2026; disposed without entering merits; no costs; single Judge (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.).

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions to respondent no.3 (SDO, Krishnagar Sub-Division (Sadar)) to consider the petitioner's representation dated February 11, 2026, cause inspection and demarcation through competent Amins/Surveyors after prior notice to affected persons, initiate statutory proceedings if encroachment on Government land is found, and complete the exercise within 8 weeks; no order as to costs.

Kamales Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent authorities ought to be directed to act upon the petitioner's representation dated February 11, 2026 seeking removal of alleged unauthorised encroachment by private respondents on Government land adjacent to the petitioner's plot (No.57, Mouza-par Chandannagar, J.L. No.36, District Nadia), which allegedly obstructs his ingress and egress to the main road.

¶16

Court's answer

Without entering into the merits of the claim made in the representation dated February 11, 2026, the writ petition stands disposed of by directing the Sub Divisional Officer, Krishnagar Sub-Division (Sadar), respondent no.3, to consider the petitioner's representation dated February 11, 2026.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The SDO is to cause necessary inspection and demarcation through competent Amins/Surveyors upon prior service of notice to the petitioner, the private respondents and any other persons who may be affected by such demarcation.

¶20

Key takeaways

Upon such demarcation, if encroachment upon the Government land is found, necessary proceedings in accordance with the relevant provisions of the statute shall be initiated, and the entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible but positively within 8 weeks from receipt of a server copy of the order along with a copy of the representation dated February 11, 2026.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition disposed of without entering into merits. The petitioner, owner of plot No.57, Mouza-par Chandannagar, J.L. No.36, District Nadia, alleged that private respondents had raised pucca construction by encroaching on adjacent Government land, obstructing his ingress and egress to the main road; his representation dated February 11, 2026 to the Sub Divisional Officer, Krishnagar Sub-Division (Sadar) remained unacted upon. The Court directed respondent no.3 (SDO) to consider the representation, cause inspection and demarcation through competent Amins/Surveyors upon prior notice to the petitioner, the private respondents and other affected persons, and upon finding encroachment on Government land, initiate necessary proceedings under the relevant statute, completing the entire exercise positively within 8 weeks of receipt of a server copy of the order together with a copy of the representation. No order as to costs.

¶1

M/L- 42 09/06/2026 Ct. No.-19 Aritra

¶2

WPA 10905 of 2026

¶3

Kamales Ghosh Vs.

¶4

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶5

Mr. Timir Baran Saha

¶6

Mr. Nilanjan Bhattacharyya, S.S.C., Ms. Jayita Dhar Chakraborty Mr. Rhitam Chatterjee

¶7

….for the petitioner ….for the State

¶8

Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.

¶9

The learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the private respondents have been duly served.

¶10

In spite of service none appears for the private respondents.

¶11

Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned Senior Standing Counsel, who usually represents the State is present in Court and is requested to appear in this matter.

¶12

Let the appointment of Mr. Bhattacharyya along with a junior of his choice be regularised by the concerned authority.

¶13

A copy of the writ petition has been served upon Mr. Bhattacharyya in course of hearing of this writ petition.

¶14

The petitioner claims to be the owner of a plot of land being No.57 within Mouza-par Chandannagar, J.L. No.36 in the District of Nadia. The petitioner states that there is a Government land lying adjacent to the aforesaid property of the petitioner. The petitioner alleges that the

¶15

¶16

private respondents have raised a pucca construction by encroaching upon the Government land thereby creating obstruction to the ingress and egress of the petitioner from his property to the main road.

¶17

The petitioner submitted a representation before the Sub Divisional Officer, Krishnagar Sub-Division (Sadar) by a letter dated February 11, 2026, requesting such authority to remove the unauthorised encroachment from the Government land.

¶18

The learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that in spite of receipt of such representation, no steps have been taken by the respondent authorities till date.

¶19

Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned Senior Standing Counsel submits that necessary steps in accordance with law shall be taken if any encroachment upon the Government land is found.

¶20

In the light of the submission made by the learned advocates for the respective parties and without entering into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner in the representation dated February 11, 2026, WPA 10905 of 2026 stands disposed of by directing the Sub Divisional Officer, Krishnagar Sub-Division (Sadar), being the respondent no.3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated February 11, 2026 and after causing necessary inspection and demarcation through competent Amins/Surveyors upon prior service of notice to the petitioner, the private respondents and any other persons,

¶21

¶22

who may be affected by such demarcation and upon such demarcation if it is found that there has been encroachment upon the Government land, necessary proceedings in accordance with the relevant provisions of the statute shall be initiated and the entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible but positively within a period of 8 weeks from the receipt of a server copy of this order along with a copy of the representation dated February 11, 2026.

¶23

There will be no order as to costs.

¶24

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶25

(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)

Kamales Ghosh v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamales Ghosh v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arijit Kundu Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Alauddin Sheik Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Shantanu Manna Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Narendranath Mahato Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sudipa Talik Barh Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Debasish Panda Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.