Sukdeb Prasad Sharma Biswas and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sukdeb Prasad Sharma Biswas and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the petitioners to make an application for renewal of the plan sanctioned on 19.04.2021 and expiring on 18.04.2026, at the earliest; the respondent/Municipality to consider the said application for renewal expeditiously, preferably within 15 days from the date of application.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent/Municipality ought to be directed to remove the private respondents (street vendors) illegally occupying the streets in front of the petitioners' property and to cancel their trade licences, if any. +1 more

Court's answer

No direction was issued for removal of the private respondents/encroachers or for cancellation of their trade licences; the writ was disposed of with liberty confined to seeking renewal of the sanctioned plan.

Ratio / Principle

The writ application is disposed of with liberty granted to the petitioners to make an application for renewal of the plan sanctioned on 19.04.2021 and expiring on 18.04.2026, at the earliest.

Key takeaways

The respondent/Municipality shall consider the petitioners' application for renewal expeditiously, preferably within 15 days from the date of application.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WPA 1203 of 2026 (order dated 16.04.2026, Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.): Petitioners sought (i) direction to the respondent/Municipality to remove private respondents/street vendors illegally occupying the streets in front of their property and to cancel their trade licences, if any, and (ii) extension of a building plan duly sanctioned on 19.04.2021 and renewed upto 18.04.2026 for a further period of three years, construction having been impossible owing to the encroachment. The Municipality submitted that under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 it is the State authority responsible for removing such encroachment and the Municipality has no role; it further referred to a Division Bench order dated 07.01.2026 in PIL W.P.A. (P) 573 of 2025 directing consideration of the vendors' case, a reasoned order passed after hearing the encroachers, and a pending civil suit. The Court disposed of the writ application, granting liberty to the petitioners to apply for renewal of the plan at the earliest and directing the Municipality to consider the renewal application expeditiously, preferably within 15 days from the date of application; no direction was issued for removal of the encroachers or cancellation of trade licences.

16.04.2026 Item No.26 Ct. No. 30 Aloke

WPA 1203 of 2026

Sukdeb Prasad Sharma Biswas & Ors.

Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Soumya Majumder, ld. Sr. Adv.

Mr. Rajdeep Pramanik

Ms. Simika Roy ..for the petitioners

Mr. Tapas Kr. Roy

… for the State

Ms. Dipanwita Ganguly

… for the private respondent nos. 7 of 32

Mr. Rajib Mukherjee

Mr. Siddhartha Banerjee Mr. R. Singh … for the Uttarpara-Kotrung Municipality

The writ application has been preferred praying for direction upon the respondent/Municipality to remove the private respondents from the illegally occupied streets in front of the property of the petitioners, on cancelling the trade license of the private respondents, if any.

The next prayer of the petitioners is for direction upon the respondent authorities to extend the plan duly sanctioned on 19.04.2021 and renewed upto 18.04.2026 for a further period of three years .

Learned senior counsel Mr. Majumder appearing for the petitioners submits, that as the encroachment has not been removed till date the petitioners could not make any construction in spite of being granted a plan duly sanctioned on 19.04.2021.

Learned counsel for the Municipality submits that as per the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and

2

Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, it is the State authority who is responsible for removing such encroachment and the Municipality has no role to play.

It is further stated that in a Public Interest Litigation being W.P.A. (P) 573 of 2025, the Hon’ble Division Bench, vide an order dated 07.01.2026, was pleased to direct the authorities to consider the case of the street vendors whose removal has been prayed for by the petitioners herein and on giving a hearing to the said encroachers, a reasoned order was passed. It is further stated that a civil suit is also pending before a Civil Court.

Mr. Majumder further submits that at this stage, pending removal of the said vendors/encroachers, the petitioners pray for renewal of the plan sanctioned in their favour, which is due to expire on 18.04.2026, for a further period of three years, considering that till date they are unable to make construction as per the sanctioned plan, because of the unauthorized encroachment by the street vendors.

Learned counsel for the Municipality submits that for such renewal, the petitioners have to make an application and the same will be duly considered by the Municipality.

Accordingly, on hearing the learned counsels for the parties and on perusal of the materials on record and the submissions made by the parties herein, the writ application is disposed of with liberty granted to the petitioners to make an application for renewal of the said plan, which was sanctioned on 19.04.2021 and expires on

3

18.04.2026 at the earliest and the respondent/Municipality shall consider the said application for renewal expeditiously, preferably within 15 days from the date of application.

WPA 1203 of 2026 stands disposed of.

Connected application, if any, stands disposed of.

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

(Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.)