Disposed¶17

Rajeev Sinha v. the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC12 May 2026WPO/657/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Illegal construction; regularisation of unauthorised construction; alternative remedy / appellate remedy bar to writ jurisdiction; section 393A Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act 1980; Rule 26(2a) and (2b) Kolkata Municipal Corporation Building Rules 2009; premises no.51 Muktaram Babu Street, Ward No.41, Borough V, Kolkata; KMC; completion certificate; additional floor sanctioned; writ petition disposed of without adjudication; Raja Basu Chowdhury J.; decided 12 May 2026.

What did the court decide?

Noting from the order passed by the municipal authorities that the municipalities have regularised the illegal construction, there was no scope for the Court to decide the petitioner's contention at this stage. ¶16

Rajeev Sinha Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

OD-09

¶2

WPO/657/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE

¶3

Rajeev Sinha

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of West Bentgal & Ors.

¶6

Before:

¶7

The Hon’ble Justice RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY Date: 12^th May 2026

¶8

Appearance: Mr. Amish Roy Advocate Mr. Soujanyo Pattanayak, Advocate for the petitioner

¶9

Mr. Gopal Ch, Das, Advocate Ms. Ananya Das, Advocate for the KMC Mr. M. Jaiswal, Advocate Mr. Shyamal Chakraborty, Advocate for respondent no.8

¶10

Complaining illegal construction at premises no.51, Muktaram Babu Street, Ward No.41, Borough – V, Kolkata, the instant writ petition has been filed.

¶11

Learned advocate for the municipality is present in Court. By placing a report dated 22^nd August 2025 it is submitted that in respect of the aforesaid premises a sanctioned building plan was issued under section 393A of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 and a regularised plan approved under Rule 26(2a) and (2b) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Building Rules – 2009

¶12

dated 30^th June 2023 for a G+IV storeyed residential building was

¶13

¶14

sanctioned. Completion certificate has already been issued and one additional floor over an G+IV storied residential building has been sanctioned/regularised.

¶15

The private respondent is represented. According to him, the issue of regularisation of illegal construction can no longer survive after the order of regularisation has been passed.

¶16

Having heard the learned advocates representing the respective parties and noting from the order passed by the municipal authorities that the municipalities have regularised the illegal construction, I am of the view that at this stage there is no scope for this Court to decide the petitioner’s contention, since the order of regularisation is subject to appellate remedy. This Court, thus, does not seek to entertain the writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy.

¶17

Accordingly the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶18

(RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY, J.)

¶19

R. Bose

Rajeev Sinha v. the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeev Sinha v. the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sultan Khichi Vs Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Subhasish Singha and Ors. Vs Burdwan Municipality and Ors.

Bidisha Rakshit and Anr. Vs Bidhannagar Municipality and Ors.

Pramila Shah and Ors. Vs Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Rajeev Sinha Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Rajeev Sinha Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.