Authorities must comply with court orders for environmental restoration as mandated by statute, failure of which may lead to enforcement actions.

JUDGMENT :

PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.

1. In this writ petition which is in the nature of a public interest litigation, the writ petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ/writs against the respondent authorities more specifically, against the Respondent No. 5 authority as well as against the Respondent Nos. 9 and 10 authorities commanding them for due implementation of the order dated 02.05.2022 as passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WPA(P) No. 190/2022 ( Bharat Kumar Jhawar vs. The State of West Bengal and Ors. ) vis-a-vis the order dated 13.06.2022 as passed in RVW No. 80 of 2022 ( Saffiujjaman Sk. vs. Bharat Kumar Jhawar and Ors. ) by the selfsame coordinate Bench of this Court.

2. It is pertinent to mention herein that by the said order dated 02.05.2022 the said coordinate Bench while disposing WPA(P)/190/2022 directed the Respondent No. 10 authority therein to take an appropriate expeditious action for restoration of the water body to its original position. It is equally pertinent to mention herein that the said order dated 02.05.2022 was sought to be reviewed in RVW 80 of 2022 which was however, dismissed by the said coordinate Bench.

3. At the time of hearing, Mr. Lahiri, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner at the very outset draws attention of this Court to Page Nos. 23 and 24 of the instant writ petition being a print out of the details of the relevant plot No. 2154 which is classified as “Pukur” (water body) having an area of 1.2050 acre. It is submitted by Mr. Lahiri that subject matter of the aforementioned writ petition as well as the petition for review was the said water body situated in Plot No. 2154 in Mouza and P.S. Beldanga.

4. Drawing attention to Page No. 36 of the instant writ petition being a copy of the letter dated 13.05.2022 as issued by the Respondent No. 10 authority addressed to the raiyat of the said plot being the respondent No. 12 herein Mr. Lahiri contended that pursuant to the aforementioned two orders of the Hon’ble Court the private respondent No. 12 raiyat was directed to restore the said water body to its original position in view of the provision of Section 17A(10) of the Inland Fisheries Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act in short) within a stipulated period.

5. Placing reliance upon Page Nos. 9 to 14 of the supplementary affidavit as filed by the writ petitioner and as affirmed on 22.07.2025, it is argued by Mr. Lahiri that since the Respondent No. 12 raiyat failed to comply with the requisition of the said notice dated 13.05.2022 the Respondent Nos. 8 to 12 authority prepared an estimate for restoration of the said water body which contains sectional elevation plan of longer side as well as of shorter side of the said pond as would be revealed from Page Nos. 12 and 13 of the supplementary affidavit.

6. It is submitted further that from Page No. 15 of the said supplementary affidavit it would reveal further that the UDMA Department, Government of West Bengal by its memo dated 13.09.2024 had granted administrative approval to such estimate.

7. At this juncture, attention of ours is also drawn to the report in the form of memo dated 07.08.2025 as submitted before this Court by the Respondent No. 5 authority. It is contended by Mr. Lahiri that from Page Nos. 19 and 20 of the said report dated 07.08.2025 it would reveal that the jurisdictional BL & LRO under cover of this memo dated 06.08.2025 addressed to the Respondent No. 5 authority intimated the following:-

“…. 3. Water body, situated