Disposed¶15

Brajamohan Mishra v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC1 Jul 2026WPA/13814/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition (WPA/13814/2026) against demolition notice dated 09.04.2026 by Assistant Engineer, Panskura, Irrigation and Waterways Department, for alleged unauthorized structure at LR Dag No. 363, Mouza Kola, JL No. 287, Purba Medinipur; notice set aside for violation of natural justice (no reply to show cause, no personal hearing); petition treated as representation and remanded for decision after personal hearing within 8 weeks; merits left open; disposed of with directions by Partha Sarathi Sen, J. on 01.07.2026.

What did the court decide?

Demolition notice dated 09.04.2026 set aside; writ petition treated as a representation and remanded to the Assistant Engineer, Panskura Irrigation and Waterways Department, to decide the petitioner's contentions after affording a personal hearing within 8 weeks; merits left open. ¶15

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the demolition notice dated 09.04.2026, issued without affording the petitioner an opportunity to file a reply to the show cause notice or a personal hearing, violates principles of natural justice and is liable to be set aside.

¶9

Court's answer

The demolition notice dated 09.04.2026 was issued without affording the petitioner an opportunity of filing a reply to the show cause notice or a personal hearing; such notice is in utter violation of principles of natural justice and is liable to be set aside.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

The impugned order dated 09.04.2026 is set aside; the writ petition is treated as a representation and remanded to the Assistant Engineer, Panskura Irrigation and Waterways Department, Block I, Panskura, Purba Medinipur, to decide the petitioner's contentions after affording a personal hearing within 8 weeks.

¶14

Key takeaways

This Court has not examined the merits of the matter; the entire controversy is left open to be decided by the Assistant Engineer, Irrigation and Waterways Department in accordance with law.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Demolition notice dated 09.04.2026 issued by the Assistant Engineer, Panskura, Irrigation and Waterways Department, Block No. I, directing demolition of an alleged unauthorized structure at LR Dag No. 363, Mouza Kola, JL No. 287, District Purba Medinipur within 14 days, was challenged in a writ petition on the ground that it was issued without any opportunity to file a reply to the show cause notice or a personal hearing. Held: the notice was in utter violation of principles of natural justice and was set aside. On the stand of learned Senior Counsel for the State, the writ petition was treated as a representation and remanded to the Assistant Engineer to decide the petitioner's contentions after affording a personal hearing within 8 weeks. The Court expressly did not examine the merits and left the entire controversy open to be decided in accordance with law.

¶1

01.07.2026 Item No.05 Ct. No. 19 RP

¶2

WPA/13814/2026 BRAJAMOHAN MISHRA

¶3

¶4

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

¶5

Mr. Sabyasachi Hazra ... For the Petitioner Mr. Nilanjan Bhattacharya, Sr. Standing Counsel Ms. Jayita Dhar Chakraborty Mr. Saikat Dey … For State

¶6

Affidavit-of-service filed today is taken on record.

¶7

The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition challenging the notice dated 09.04.2026 issued by the Assistant Engineer, Panskura, Irrigation and Waterways Department, Block No. I, Panskura, Purba Medinipur directing the petitioner to demolish an unauthorized structure situated at LR Dag No. 363, Mouza Kola, JL No. 287, District Purba Medinipur within 14 days, failing which the department will take appropriate action for demolition of the said structure. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the owner of the above mentioned

¶8

¶9

property since 2006. He contended that he had purchased the said property from Mr. Arabinda De whose name is recorded as Raiyat in the Porcha of the revenue department. He further states that the present demolition notice has been issued to him without granting him any personal hearing or affording an opportunity to show cause.

¶10

Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent-State of West Bengal states that the present matter can be remanded back to the irrigation department to consider the present writ petition as a representation of the petitioner and the petitioner can be afforded an opportunity of personal hearing by the Assistant Engineer before passing any order of demolition.

¶11

After perusal of the materials on record and in view of the submissions advanced by the parties, this Court is of the view that the demolition notice dated

¶12

¶13

09.04.2026 has been issued without affording the petitioner an opportunity of filing a reply to the show cause notice or without granting him any personal hearing. Such notice is in utter violation of principles of natural justice and is therefore liable to be set aside.

¶14

In view of the stand taken by the learned Senior Counsel for the State of West Bengal, the impugned order dated 09.04.2026 is hereby set aside. The present writ petition is to be treated as a representation and the same is remanded back to the Assistant Engineer, Panskura Irrigation and Waterways Department, Block I, Panskura, Purba Medinipur to decide the contentions of the petitioner after affording her an opportunity of personal hearing within a period of 8 weeks from today.

¶15

With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition is disposed of.

¶16

¶17

It is clarified that this Court has not examined the merits of the matter. The entire controversy is left open to be decided by the Assistant Engineer, Irrigation and Waterways Department in accordance with law.

¶18

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

¶19

(PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.)

Brajamohan Mishra v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brajamohan Mishra 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

Tarun Kanti Mondal and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Md. Idrish and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Chanderpara Fisherman Co-Operative Society Ltd. & Anr. Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Swapan Koley and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Shyamal Sardar and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Tapas Kumar Sarkar and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.