Back
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Rajasekhar Mantha, Ajay Kumar Gupta, JJ
Md. Surabuddin Peada – Appellant
Versus
Md. Asgar Ali Peada & Ors. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellant wishes to withdraw appeal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. municipal authority's decision to demolish unauthorized construction upheld. (Para 5 , 6 , 11) |
| 3. legal delays by appellants reject further appeals. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 4. mandate to carry out demolition enforced by police assistance. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
1. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, Mr. Bhattacharya submits on instructions that the appellant in F.M.A. No. 965 of 2024 does not wish to press this appeal any further.
2. Written instructions of the appellant addressed to his learned Advocate be kept with the record. The appellant is also personally present before this Court.
3. In that view of the matter, F.M.A. 965 of 2024 shall stand dismissed as not pressed.
4. There will be no order as to costs.
Re: MAT 818 of 2025 & MAT 897 of 2025
5. The challenge in the instant appeals is to an order dated 6th May, 2025 passed by a Single Bench of this Court. The Single Bench found that the Commissioner of Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation passed an order under Section 266 of the West Bengal Municipal Act dated 28th January, 2025 rejecting the representation of the appellants and directing demolition of u
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
