Allowed

Paribesh Academy v. the State of West Bengal

NGT16 Feb 2026IA No. 17/2026 in Original Application No. 162/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Green Tribunal permitted the District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly to file an application for waiver of costs due to delay in submitting a report caused by other election duties. The Tribunal directed the official to file additional details regarding a pending matter with the Land Reforms Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Waiver of costs of Rs. 10,000/; direction to file additional response with copies of pending applications and orders.

Paribesh Academy vs the State of West Bengal — Writ and Judicial Review | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No.07

¶2

Court No.1

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA (THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING WITH HYBRID MODE)

¶4

Original Application No.162/2025/EZ I.A. No. 17/2026/EZ

¶5

Paribesh Academy & Ors. Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of West Bengal and Ors. Respondents

¶8

Date of hearing: 16.02.2026

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER

¶10

Applicant: Mr. Bikash Shaw, Advocate for the applicants (through VC).

¶11

Respondents: Mr. Sudip Kumar Dutta, Advocate for respondents no. 1 to 6, 8 & 9 (through VC). None for respondent no.7. Mr. Sibojyoti Chakrabarty, Advocate for respondent no.8 (through VC). Mr. Ritoprita Ghosh, Advocate for respondent no.10 (through VC).

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The applicant has filed the present original application complaining about encroachments on water body and seeking injunction against filling up the same and raising of construction on the same.

¶14

Vide order dated 11.12.2025 this Tribunal sought report from the District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly before issuing notice to all the respondents.

¶15

In compliance of order dated 11.12.2025, report dated 11.02.2026 has been filed by respondent no.2-District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly.

¶16

In the report it has been mentioned that the land in question which is comprised in J.L. No.18, L.R Plot No. 7309 area 0.96 acres, situated in

¶17

¶18

Mouza-Kulihanda, P.S. Chuchura, within ambit of Kodalia-II G.P. Hooghly is recorded as Shali/Pukur and in the course of enquiry it was found that said plot is partly built up and partly covered with trees and shrubs. In the report the District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly has also mentioned that the land is classified as a pond but no pond was currently visible on the land and that FIR under Section 4D of West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 was registered. In the report it has also been mentioned that the matter is pending before the West Bengal Land Reforms & Tenancy Tribunal.

¶19

Even though District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly has attached copy of order dated 27.11.2025 but the District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly has not attached the copy of the application which is pending and the copy of substantial orders which have been passed in the above mentioned case and from order dated 27.11.2025 it is not possible to ascertain as to what is the nature of the application filed and what are the reliefs claimed in the application before the West Bengal Land Reforms & Tenancy Tribunal.

¶20

The question as to what is the effect of pendency of above said application on adjudication of the substantial environmental questions regarding restoration of the water body involved in the present original application has to be looked into before proceeding further and directing issuance of notices to the respondents.

¶21

Even though we have not passed any order directing issuance of notices to the respondents, Mr. Sibojyoti Chakrabarty, learned Counsel has appeared for respondent no.8- District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly. Mr. Sudip Kumar Dutta, learned Counsel appeared for respondents no. 1 to 6 and Mr. Ritoprita Ghosh, learned Counsel has appeared for respondent no.10.

¶22

¶23

I.A. No. 17/2026/EZ has been filed by District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly for waiver of costs of Rs. 10,000/- imposed on him vide order dated 21.01.2026.

¶24

The District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly has submitted in the abovesaid I.A. that the report could not be filed as most of the officials of the District Administration were busy in the SIR hearing as the same was required to be completed as per the guidelines of the Election Commission of India and all the documents in connection with the instant original application were not readily available with the District Administration which took some more time for filing the report and there was no intentional delay and negligence on the part of the District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly. While tendering unconditional apology the District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly has prayed for waiver of costs of Rs. 10,000/-.

¶25

We have heard learned Counsel for the District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly and gone through the relevant record.

¶26

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, reasons mentioned in the above-mentioned I.A. and also unconditional apology tendered by the District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly, we are inclined to accept the prayer and accordingly allow I.A. No. 17/2026/EZ and waive the cost of Rs. 10,000/- imposed on the District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly vide order dated 21.01.2026.

¶27

District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly is directed to file additional response along with copy of the application filed before West Bengal Land Reforms & Tenancy Tribunal and also orders passed on the same.

¶28

¶29

List for filing of additional response by District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly on 13.04.2026.

¶30

A copy of this order may be also sent to District Magistrate & Collector, Hooghly by email for requisite compliance.

¶31

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶32

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶33

February 16^th , 2026 Original Application No.162/2026/EZ AM

¶34

Paribesh Academy v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Paribesh Academy v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K. Balamurugan vs the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority

Sushil Raghav vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Social Action for Forest & Environment (Safe) vs Union of India

Social Action for Forest & Environment (Safe) vs Union of India

Daulat Ram S/O Shri Kuldeep Gena vs State of Rajasthan through District Collector Ajmer

Daulat Ram S/O Shri Kuldeep Gena vs State of Rajasthan through District Collector Ajmer

Reena Varghese vs Kerala State Pollution Control Board

Reena Varghese vs Kerala State Pollution Control Board

President Municipal Committee Thathri vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 130/2024 in Original Application No. 9/2023 of Bharat Sehrawat vs Dr Umesh Verma

Mamta Sharma vs Gram Sabha

Manas Panigrahy S/O: Narayan Panigrahy Aged About 28 Years vs 1. State Pollution Control Board Odisha Represented through ItS Member Secretary

Ashish Sharma vs

Ashish Sharma vs