Disposed¶14

Jayanta Kumar Maity v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC7 Jul 2026WPA/13682/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WPA 13682 of 2026, Jayanta Kumar Maity v. The State of W.B. & Ors., decided 07.07.2026. Alleged unauthorised construction / deviation from sanctioned building plan; direction to Pradhan, Moukhali Gram Panchayat to decide representation dated 26.05.2026 within four weeks after hearing all parties; writ petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Pradhan, Moukhali Gram Panchayat (5th respondent) to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 26th May, 2026 within four weeks with hearing to all parties; liberty to produce documents; decision to be communicated within a week thereof; necessary steps if violation found. ¶14

Jayanta Kumar Maity Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the construction being raised by the private respondents is without sanction from the concerned Panchayat or in violation/deviation of the sanctioned building plan and building rules, requiring enquiry by the appropriate authority.

¶8

Court's answer

Since the petitioner alleges that the construction is being raised in violation of building rules and upon deviation from the sanctioned building plan, the allegation needs to be enquired into by the appropriate authority.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

The Pradhan, Moukhali Gram Panchayat (5th respondent) is directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 26th May, 2026 within four weeks from communication of the order, affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioner and the private respondents, in accordance with law.

¶10

Key takeaways

If it is found that the construction raised by the private respondents is either without sanction or in violation of the building plan granted in their favour, necessary steps shall be taken by the authority at the earliest.obiter¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition disposed of. Petitioner alleged that private respondents were raising construction without sanction from the concerned Panchayat and in violation of building rules, despite respondents' claim of construction per sanctioned building plan dated 29th August, 2017. Court directed the Pradhan, Moukhali Gram Panchayat (5th respondent) to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 26th May, 2026 within four weeks, affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioner and private respondents, in accordance with law. Parties permitted to produce relevant documents at the hearing; decision to be communicated to parties within a week thereof; if construction found without sanction or in violation of the sanctioned plan, necessary steps to be taken by the authority at the earliest.

¶1

14 07.07.2026 Ct. No.15 b.das

¶2

WPA 13682 of 2026

¶3

Jayanta Kumar Maity Vs. The State of W.B. & Ors.

¶4

Mr. Supriyo Shasmal Mr. Bhaskar Mondal …for the petitioner. Mr. Suman Chattopadhyay …for the private respondents. Mr. Madhu Jana Mr. Subhojit Das …for the State.

¶5

Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken on record.

¶6

The Panchayat is not represented despite service. The petitioner alleges that the private respondents are raising construction without obtaining sanction from the concerned Panchayat and in violation of building rules. The petitioner submitted a representation in this regard before the concerned authority on 26^th May, 2026 and seeks consideration of the same.

¶7

Denying such allegation, learned counsel for the private respondents submits that the private respondents are raising construction in terms of sanctioned building plan granted in their favour on 29^th August, 2017 and after conversion of the land from ‘Sali’ and ‘Danga’ to ‘Dokanghar’.

¶8

In view of the fact that the petitioner alleges that the construction is being raised in violation of building rules

¶9

¶10

and therefore, upon deviation from the sanctioned building plan, the said allegation needs to be enquired into by the appropriate authority. The Pradhan, Moukhali Gram Panchayat, being the 5^th respondent herein, is directed to consider and dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 26^th May, 2026 within four 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.

¶11

The parties shall be at liberty to produce relevant documents in support of their respective contention before the concerned authority at the time of hearing.

¶12

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

¶13

In the event it is found that the construction raised by the private respondents is either without sanction or in violation of the building plan granted in their favour, necessary steps be taken by the authority at the earliest.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)

Jayanta Kumar Maity v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayanta Kumar Maity 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

Case details

Similar cases

Sampa Das Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Rabikul Islam Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Abdul Hannan and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Md. Kamal Hossain and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Rina Dutta Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Homadighi Agricultural Rural Development Society and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.