03.11.2025

sb

Ct.3.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION

APPELLATE SIDE

WPA 21459 of 2024

With

CAN 3 of 2025

Ripan Mondal

Versus

The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Phiroze Edulji, Sr. Advocate

Mr. Achintya Kumar Banerjee

Mr. Debjit Mukherjee

Mr Avik Ghatak

Mr. Supriyo Majumder

Ms. Afreen Begum

Mr. Soumen Chatterjee

Ms. Sayani Das

Ms. Priyanka Bhattacharya

Mr. Aritra Ranjan Dutta Roy

… For the petitioner. Mr. Swapan Banerjee

Mr. Shehnaz Tareq Mina

Mr. Ranjit Rajak … For the State.

Mr. Sankha Subhra Ray

… For the Kamarhati Municipality

Mr. Partha Sarathi Datta

… For the respondent no.9

Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, Sr. Advocate

Mr. Arindam Banerjee, Sr. Advocate

Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee

Mr. Soummyadeep Nag

Ms. Soumali Das

… For the respondent nos. 10 and 11

1. The instant writ petition has been filed inter alia

praying for an appropriate direction upon the respondent no.9 for demolition of the illegal and unauthorized construction lying and situate at 1 No. Pratap Rudra

Lane, Ariadaha, Kolkata- 700057.

2. Records would reveal that after exchange of affidavits a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 25th June, 2025 was inter alia pleased to pass the following order.

“1. The Petitioner in the present writ petition is challenging the inaction of the Respondent Municipality in not taking any action against the illegal and unauthorised construction existing at the premises No. 1, Pratap Rudra Lane, Ariadaha, Kolkata-700057 at the instance of Respondent No. 9.

2. It is the case of the Petitioner that the premises in question was a water body, and the Respondent No. 9 illegally filled it up partially and construed a G+3 story building at the said premises. Being aggrieved by the said unauthorised construction, the Petitioner filed many representations. However, Respondent Municipality failed to take any action.

3. In view thereof, this Court vide order dated 19.05.2025, passed the following order:

“5. Learned counsel for the respondent municipality seeks and is granted four weeks time to file his report by way of an affidavit indicating steps that has been taken for demolishing the said unauthorized construction in accordance with law. 6. List after five weeks on

23.6.2025”.

4. In pursuance of the said order, the Respondent Municipality issued a Notice of Eviction dated 29.05.2025 indicating that they are intended to carry out the demolition action on 13.06.2025 and asked the occupants of the said building to vacate the said premises before the said date.

5. Being aggrieved by the said eviction notice dated 29.05.2025, the newly added respondents (occupiers of the said property) challenged the same before this Court in WPA 12225/2025. The Coordinate bench of this Court, vide order dated 03.06.2025 dismissed the said writ Petition. The operative portion of the said Judgment reads as follows:

“ Taking note of these facts, the Bench scheduled the next hearing of the matter on June 23, 2025, and directed the Municipality to file a report by way of affidavit, indicating the steps proposed to be taken for the demolition of the said unauthorized construction in accordance with law. The notice under challenge in this writ petition indicates that the Municipality has undertaken the demolition process in compliance with the order passed by the Coordinate Bench. Therefore, restraining the Municipality, which is acting pursuant to an order passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, from undertaking the demolition process would amount to sitting in appeal over the decision of the Coordinate Bench, impermissible. which is Thus, in the aforesaid conspectus, I am not inclined to interfere with the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, without any order as to costs. However, this order shall not preclude the petitioner from approaching the appropriate forum in accordance with law, if so advised”.

6. The Petitioner in WPA 12225/2025 challenged the said order of the single Bench before the Division Bench in MAT 837/2025. The Hon’ble Division Bench vid