Jyotish Halder Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

By filing this instant writ petition the writ petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ or writs against the respondent authorities, more specifically the respondent no.3 authority, commanding him to take

¶13

2

¶14

appropriate steps for removal of unauthorized encroachment as allegedly made by the private respondent no.5 and/or his men and agents over the PWD land in front of the writ petitioner’s riyoti land, the particulars of which has been made in paragraph 3 of the instant writ petition.

¶15

At the time of hearing the learned advocate for the petitioner draws attention of this Court to the page no.18 of the instant writ petition, being a copy of the LR Record in respect of LR plot no.2664 in Mouza-Bhajna, P.S. Pathar Pratima, district- South 24 Parganas.

¶16

It is submitted that from the said LR Record it would reveal that the present writ petitioner is the owner of 33 decimal of land in the said plot. It is further submitted that it is the specific case of the writ petitioners that the private respondent n.5 and/or his men

¶17

3

¶18

and agents have made encroachment over the PWD land and as a result whereof the writ petitioner is facing difficulty in getting free access to his aforementioned plot of land.

¶19

It is further submitted that despite submission of representation dated 28.03.2026, a copy of which has been annexed at page no.19 of the instant writ petition, the respondent authorities have not taken any steps. It is, thus, submitted that in view of such appropriate relief or reliefs may be granted to the writ petitioner in terms of prayers made in the instant writ petition.

¶20

Mr. Dhar Chakraborty, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent State in her usual fairness submits that the respondent no.3 may be directed to consider the representation as submitted by the writ petitioner in accordance with law.

¶21

4

¶22

Such being the position, this Court directs the respondent no.4 authority to cause a field verification after giving prior notice to the writ petitioner and the private respondent and shall submit a demarcation report with the respondent no.3 authority within thirty (30) working days from the date of communication of a server copy of this order, if not done in the meantime.

¶23

The respondent no.3 authority on receipt of the demarcation report from the respondent no.4 authority shall cause service of notice upon the petitioner and the private respondent. The respondent no.3 is further directed to consider the representation dated 28.03.2026 as submitted by the writ petitioner in accordance with law and in the light of the demarcation report as would be submitted by the respondent no.4 authority and after giving due chance of hearing to the writ petitioner

¶24

5

¶25

and the private respondent and/or their authorized representatives, shall pass a reasoned order and shall forthwith communicate the same both to the writ petitioner and the private respondents.

¶26

The entire exercise as indicated in the foregoing paragraphs is to be completed within 45 working days from the date of receipt of the report from the respondent no.4 authority.

¶27

The time limit as fixed by this Court is peremptory and mandatory.

¶28

The learned advocate-on-record of the writ petitioner is directed to communicate the server copy of this order to the respondent nos.3 and 4 authority, who are directed to act on the basis of the server copy of this order.

¶29

It is further directed that in the event the respondent no.3 authority while passing the reasoned order finds sufficient justification in the

¶30

6

¶31

representation of the writ petitioner he is directed to take consequential action forthwith.

¶32

With the aforementioned observations the instant writ petition is disposed of.

¶33

Before parting with, it is made clear that while disposing the writ petition this Court has not gone into the merits of the representation dated 28.03.2026 as submitted by the writ petitioner before the respondent authorities. Thus, all points are kept open for adjudication by the respondent no.3 authority.

¶34

17. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be delivered to the learned advocates for the parties, upon compliance of all formalities.

¶35

(PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.)

Jyotish Halder v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jyotish Halder 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

Anita Karmakar Vs Abul Kalam Azad Islam, the Commissioner, Durgapur Municipal Corporation

Amiya Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Mohan Dandapat and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Bholanath Mitra Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Ajmal Uddin Sekh @ Ajmoluddin Sk. @ Ajmal Uddin Sk. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Saikat Sarkar Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.