Amiya Kumar Das Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Amiya Kumar Das Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the 2nd respondent (Assistant Engineer, Contai Highway Sub-Division, Public Works (Roads) Directorate, Contai) to take steps in accordance with law to remove the unauthorized encroachment from the PWD road, the entire exercise to be completed as expeditiously as possible but positively within eight weeks from date.

Issue for consideration

Whether private-respondents have encroached upon the PWD road adjacent to the petitioner's land, obstructing his right of ingress and egress. +1 more

Court's answer

On a prima facie reading of the Revenue Inspector's enquiry report dated February 16, 2026, it appears that the petitioner himself has encroached upon a portion of the PWD road; the Court expressly labels this a prima facie observation and leaves it open to the Assistant Engineer to consider the report and take steps in accordance with law.

Ratio / Principle

Since the enquiry report indicates an encroachment upon the PWD road and the report has been forwarded to the Assistant Engineer, Contai Highway Sub-Division, Public Works (Roads) Directorate, Contai (2nd respondent), the writ petition stands disposed of by directing the 2nd respondent to take steps in accordance with law to remove the unauthorized encroachment from the PWD road, completing the entire exercise expeditiously and positively within eight weeks from date.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WPA 14394 of 2025, decided 06.03.2026) by Amiya Kumar Das, owner of 5 decimals of land in Dag Nos. 9264 and 9265, JL No. 16, Mouza Kamarda, Khejuri Police Station, Purba Medinipur, complaining that private-respondents encroached upon the adjacent PWD road by erecting shops with tin roofs, obstructing his ingress and egress, and that authorities failed to act on his representations. A Revenue Inspector enquiry report dated February 16, 2026, placed on record through the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Khejuri-I report dated February 17, 2026, prima facie indicated encroachment on the PWD road — including that the petitioner himself had encroached a portion — and was forwarded to the Assistant Engineer, Contai Highway Sub-Division, Public Works (Roads) Directorate, Contai (2nd respondent). The Court made only a prima facie observation, leaving it open to the Assistant Engineer to consider the report and act in accordance with law, and disposed of the writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent to remove the unauthorized encroachment from the PWD road within eight weeks. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)

Court No. 19

WPA 14394 of 2025

(265719)

06.03.2026 (AD 12)

Amiya Kumar Das Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

(S. Banerjee)

Mr. Kamal Mishra Mr. Soumitra Bandyopadhyay Mr. Ramchandra Guchhait Mr. Chittapriya Ghosh Ms. Priyanka Saha

…for the petitioner …for the State …for the private-respondent nos. 7 to 9

Petitioner claims to be the owner of a piece of land measuring 5 decimals in Dag Nos. 9264 and 9265, JL No. 16, within Mouza – Kamarda, under Khejuri Police Station in the district of Purba Medinipur. Petitioner states that there is a PWD road running adjacent to the aforesaid property of the petitioner and private-respondents have encroached upon the PWD road by constructing shops with tin roofs and as a result of such construction the petitioner’s right of ingress and egress from his property to the PWD road has been obstructed. The petitioner submitted a representation before various authorities. Alleging inaction on the part of the respondent authorities, the petitioner has approached this Court.

2

Today when this matter is taken up for hearing, Mr. Guchhait, learned advocate appearing for the State files a report of the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Khejuri-I, Purba Medinipur dated February 17, 2026, which is taken on record. Copy of such report has been served upon the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate appearing for the privaterespondents.

From the enquiry report prepared by the Revenue Inspector on February 16, 2026, it prima facie appears that the petitioner has encroached upon a portion of the PWD road. It further appears from the bunch of documents filed by Mr. Guchhait that copy of the said report has been forwarded to the Assistant Engineer, Contai Highway Sub-Division, Public Works (Roads) Directorate, Contai under memo dated February 17, 2026.

Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate appearing for the private-respondents submits that the report does not indicate any encroachment at the instance of the private-respondents.

The aforesaid observation regarding encroachment is a prima facie observation of this Court and it will be open to the Assistant Engineer to

3

consider the said report and take steps in accordance with law.

Since the enquiry report indicates an encroachment upon the PWD road and such report having been forwarded to the Assistant Engineer, Contai Highway Sub-Division, Public Works (Roads) Directorate, Contai, being the 2^nd respondent, this writ petition stands disposed of by directing the 2^nd respondent to take steps in accordance with law to remove the unauthorized encroachment from the PWD road. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible but positively within a period of eight weeks from date.

(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)