Rabin Kandar and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

14.07.2026 Item No.19 Court No.01 Avijit Mitra

WPA (P) 331 of 2026

Rabin Kandar & anr. - Versus – The State of West Bengal & ors.

Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha …for the petitioners Mr. D.N. Ray, Ld. G.P., Mr. Ajit Kumar Mishra, Ld. AGP, Ms. Anjana Banerjee …for the State Mr. Abhijit Sarkar ….for the respondent no.6

¶5

Affidavit-of-service, as filed, be kept on record.

¶6

The present Public Interest Litigation (in short, PIL) has been preferred by the petitioners primarily praying for issuance of necessary direction upon the respondent no.4 ‘ to take cognizance considering the allegation made by the writ petitioners about the illegal filling up of the water body and also the ill intention to use the pond otherwise ’.

¶7

Mr. Sinha, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the private respondent nos. 6 to 11 are the recorded owners of landed property classified as ‘ Pukur ’ comprising R.S. Plot and L.R. Plot No.3702, L.R. Khatian Nos.832,1682,2080, 2265 and 2383 under Mouza-Natsal, J.L. No.157, measuring about 13 decimals. Without obtaining

¶8

2

¶9

necessary sanction and without converting the status of the land, the private respondents are trying to fill up the said pond in blatant violation of the statutory provisions. Immediately upon ascertaining such illegal activities, the petitioners reported such activities to the respondent no.4 but the said respondent maintained a deceptive silence.

¶10

Mr. Sarkar, learned advocate appearing for the private respondent no.6 submits that the classification of L.R. Plot No.3702 has been changed from ‘ Pukur ’ to ‘ Bastu ’ on the basis of an order dated 17^th December, 2025 passed by the competent authority. Let the said memo, as placed, be kept on record. A copy of the same has also been handed over to Mr. Sinha, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners.

¶11

Mr. Ray, learned Government Pleader enters appearance on behalf of the State respondents.

¶12

We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considered the materials on record.

¶13

The allegations levelled in the writ petition are primarily directed against the private respondents, who, according to the petitioners, have filled up land classified as ‘ Pukur ’ without availing necessary

¶14

3

¶15

permission from the competent authority. Such allegation is not acceptable in view of the certificate of conversation pertaining to the land in question issued by the District Land and Land Reforms Officer vide memo dated 30^th July, 2025 in favour of the respondent no.6. The writ petition appears to have been preferred on the basis of vague allegations.

¶16

In view thereof, no interference is called for in the present PIL being WPA (P) 331 of 2026 and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶17

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

¶18

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties.

¶19

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, A.C.J.)

Rabin Kandar and Anr. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rabin Kandar and Anr. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tausif Iqbal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Jayanta Jana Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

MD Samim Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Maa Muktakeshi Potato Freezing Private Ltd. and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Dulan Mohanta Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Gopal Prasad Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.