Kashinath Motilal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Mr. Halder, learned advocate representing the respondent nos. 8 and 9 would submit that his clients have not carried out any unauthorized construction. 5. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and noting that a complaint has been lodged by the petitioner on 22^nd July, 2026, I am of the view that the municipal authorities must take a decision on the petitioner’s complaint upon giving an

2

WPA 23695 of 2026

¶20

opportunity of hearing to the contesting parties and by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law.

Since no affidavit-in-opposition has been called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents.

With the above observations and directions the writ petition is disposed of. 8. The petitioner is directed to communicate this order to the municipality.

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

(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)

Kashinath Motilal v. State of West Bengal and Ors.