Md. Mojibar Rahaman Seikh Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

3. By filing the instant writ petition, the writ petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate Writ/Writs against the respondent authorities, more specifically against the Respondent No.6 authority for taking appropriate steps for removal of the alleged illegal encroachment as made by the private respondents over the government land. It is submitted that from the materials as placed before this Court it would reveal that the writ petitioner is the owner of 0.04 decimal of land in Plot No.1025 of Mouza-Banipur, under P.S.-Mograhat, District-South 24 Parganas.

¶14

Page 2 of 4

¶15

4. It is submitted that it is the specific case of the writ petitioner that the private respondents have encroached PWD road in front of the writ petitioner’s aforementioned property, as a result whereof, the writ petitioner’s access to the property has been blocked. It is, thus, submitted that appropriate relief/reliefs may be granted to the writ petitioner in terms of prayers made in the instant writ petition. It is submitted further that one representation dated 14.05.2026 was submitted with the respondent authorities requesting them to take appropriate steps for removal of the encroachment but in vain.

¶16

5. In course of his submission, Mr. Bhattacharya, learned senior standing counsel, duly assisted by Ms. Dhar Chakraborty, in his usual fairness submitted before this Court that the Respondent No.6 may be directed to consider the representation of the writ petitioner dated 14.05.2026 in accordance with law.

¶17

6. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the private respondents vehemently opposes the prayer of the writ petitioner by submitting that no cogent materials have been placed before this Court to substantiate that any portion of the PWD land in front of writ petitioner’s property has been encroached.

¶18

Page 3 of 4

¶19

7. In view of such, this Court while disposing the instant writ petition directs the Respondent No.9 authority to make a field verification on the disputed plot after giving prior notice to the writ petitioner and the private respondents and submit a demarcation report before Respondent No.6 within 30 working days from the date of communication of the server copy of this order.

¶20

8. Respondent No.6 authority on receipt of the demarcation report from Respondent No.9 shall give due notice to the writ petitioner and the private respondents and after giving due chance of hearing to both the parties shall pass a reasoned order upon the representation dated 14.05.2026 in accordance with law and shall forthwith communicate the same to both the parties to the said hearing.

¶21

9. The entire exercise, as indicated in the foregoing paragraph, is to be completed by the Respondent No.6 within 45 working days from the date of receipt of the demarcation report from the Respondent No.9 authority.

¶22

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

¶23

11. Before parting, it is made clear that while disposing of this petition this Court has not gone into the merits of the representation dated 14.05.2026 and

¶24

Page 4 of 4

¶25

thus, all points are kept open for adjudication by the Respondent No.6 authority.

¶26

12. It is further ordered that in the event while passing the reasoned order, the Respondent No.6 authority finds sufficient substance in the representation of the writ petitioner, he is directed to take all consequential action soon thereafter.

¶27

13. Liberty is given to the learned advocate-on-record to communicate the server copy of this order to the Respondent Nos.6 and 9 to act on the basis of the server copy of this order.

¶28

14. With the aforementioned observations and directions, the instant writ petition is disposed of .

¶29

15. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, on priority basis, upon compliance of all necessary formalities.

¶30

(PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.)

Md. Mojibar Rahaman Seikh v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Mojibar Rahaman Seikh 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

Anupam Mondal Vs Bijin Krishna, the District Magistrate and Colector Paschim Medinipur

Sk Saidul and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

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

MD Mahfuzul Alam Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ranjan Mondal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Dhananjoy Koley and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.