Afroja Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

¶1

15.07.2026 Item No.20 Court No.01 Avijit Mitra

¶2

WPA (P) 128 of 2026

¶3

Afroja

¶4

- Versus – State of West Bengal & ors.

¶5

Mr. Ramkrishna Bhattacharjee, Mr. Kaushik Choudhury, Mr. Dwaipayan Panda ….for the petitioner Mr. Ajit Kumar Mishra, Ld. AGP, Mr. Gopal Krishna Sarkar, Mr. Milind Mohul Ghosh …..for the State

¶6

The present writ petition, in the form of a Public Interest Litigation (in short, PIL), has been filed praying for a direction upon the concerned respondents to extend the benefits under PMAY-G to 844 beneficiaries of Lodhan Gram Panchayat under Goalpokher-I Panchayat Samiti, Uttar Dinajpur.

¶7

Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned advocate representing the petitioner, submits that the petitioner, being the Pradhan of the locality and a public-spirited person, has filed the present writ petition to espouse the cause of those persons who, though entitled to the benefits under the said scheme, have been deprived of the same.

¶8

Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Government Pleader representing the State, submits that, upon enquiry, it was found that there was substance in the petitioner's contention.

¶9

He produced a written instruction. The relevant portion of the instruction is quoted below :

¶10

‘ Apropos the captioned subject the undersigned, being the respondent no 05 in the WPA No 126 of 2026, in the matter

¶11

2

¶12

of Afroja Vs the State of West Bengal & Ors., would like to state that the said WPA claims to include 837 nos of persons to be beneficiaries of Rural Housing scheme, namely PMAY (G). A survey was conducted in 2018-19 to assess the eligibility as PMAY (G) beneficiaries and these 837 no of persons may have been left out by the surveyors or found not eligible and subsequently not included in the final beneficiary list.

¶13

However, under the present circumstances, if the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta to allow the undersigned, a re-survey the said list may be done as per the present guideline of PMAY (G) issued by the Govt. of India as the Rural Housing scheme ’.

¶14

Let the written instruction, as produced, be kept on record.

¶15

Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the materials on record.

¶16

As reflected from the written instruction placed by Mr. Mishra, the concerned respondents have already decided to resurvey the list of the proposed beneficiaries and have taken appropriate steps to address the issue raised in the writ petition.

¶17

In view thereof, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to re-survey the list of the proposed beneficiaries in accordance with the prevailing guidelines governing PMAY-G issued by the Government of India under the Rural Housing Scheme and to complete the process as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from the date of communication of this order.

¶18

In the event the beneficiaries are found to be eligible under the scheme, all necessary follow up steps shall be taken.

¶19

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

¶20

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties.

¶21

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, A.C.J.)

¶22

3

Afroja v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Afroja 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

Dulan Mohanta Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Rabin Kandar and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Gopal Prasad Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Asish Biswas and Ors.

Swapan Das Vs Union of India and Ors.

Santosh Ghorai & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.