Court No. 19 WPA 29831 of 2025 (265719)

20.01.2026 Sankar Maity (AD 10) Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

(S. Banerjee)

Mr. Tanmoy Mukherjee Mr. Tamal Taru Panda …for the petitioner Mr. Wasim Ahmed Sk. Md. Masud …for the State Affidavit of service filed in Court today, is taken on record.

The petitioner has prayed for setting aside the notice dated November 13, 2025 for removal of the unauthorized structure at National Highway - 116B (LHS) towards Digha near Bajkul VUP. The petitioner claims to be the owner and occupier of a land being LR Dag No. 1374, Khatian No. 964/1 within Mouza – Bajkul, JL No. 154 under Bhupatinagar Police Station in the district of Purba Medinipur measuring 1 decimals. The petitioner states that the petitioner has not encroached upon any portion of the National Highway and for such reason the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Drawing the attention of the Court to the Record of Rights annexed to this writ petition, Mr. Mukherjee submits that the petitioner is the recorded raiyat in respect of plot nos. 1368 and the shop-room has been constructed on the said property and the petitioner has not encroached upon any portion of the National Highway.

Mr. Ghosh, learned Senior Government Advocate, submits that only a notice under Section 26(2) of the Control of Highways (Land and Traffic) Act, 2002 has been served upon the petitioner requesting the petitioner to appear on November 21, 2025 and also an opportunity was given to the petitioner to submit a representation within the time limit indicated in the said notice. He submits that the petitioner neither submitted any representation within the time limit indicated in the said notice nor did he appear before the concerned authority on the date fixed in the said notice. He submits that since the petitioner has not complied with the directions contained in the said notice, the concerned authorities approached the concerned Superintendent of Police, Purba Medinipur for rendering necessary assistance for removal of encroachment.

In reply Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, draws the attention of the Court to page 21 of the writ petition and submits that a representation dated November 24, 2025 has been submitted at the office of the concerned authority.

Heard the learned advocates for the parties and perused the materials placed.

Section 26 of the Control of National Highways (Land and Traffic) Act, 2002 (‘the 2002 Act’, for short)

deals with removal of unauthorized occupation.

Sub-Section (2) of Section 26 of the 2002 Act states that when, as a result of the periodical inspection of Highway land or otherwise, the Highway Administration or the officer authorised by such Administration in this behalf is satisfied that any unauthorised occupation has taken place on highway land, the Highway Administration or the officer so authorised shall serve a notice in a prescribed form on the person causing or responsible for such unauthorised occupation requiring him to remove such unauthorised occupation and to restore such highway land in its original condition as before the unauthorised occupation within the period specified in the notice.

Sub-Section (3) of Section 26 of the 2002 Act states that the notice under sub-section (2) shall specify there in the highway land in respect of which such notice is issued, the period within which the unauthorised occupation on such land is required to be removed, the place and time of hearing any representation, if any, which the person to whom the notice is addressed may make within the time specified in the notice and that failure to comply with such notice shall render the person specified in the notice liable to penalty, and summary eviction from the highway land in respect of which such notice is issued, under sub-section (6).

Sub-Section (4) of Section 26 of the 2002 Act deals with the manner in which such notice is to be served.

Sub-Section (6) of Section 26 of the