19.01.2026 Item No.42 Ct. No.1 KS W.P.A. (P) 485 of 2024 Bijoy Mahato Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Partha Sarathi Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Sougata Mitra Ms. Soma Chakraborty Mr. Nikhil Kr. Gupta Mr. Subhodeep Moitra …..For the Petitioner Mr. Supriyo Chattopadhyay, Ld. A.G.P.

Mr. Shamim Ul Bari …..For the State PER, PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.:

1. The writ petitioner and the respondent/State are represented by their respective learned counsels

2. By filing the instant writ petition, the writ petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate Writ/Writs against the respondent authorities commanding them to make an arrangement for leaving a space of 12 to 15 feets wide pathway by the side of the boundary wall under construction for the purpose of user of a pathway of more 10000 villagers of 11 villagers, particulars of which has been mentioned in the instant writ petition as well as in the representation, copies of which have been annexed with the instant writ petition

3. At the time of hearing, Mr. Bhattacharya, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, at the very outset, draws our attention to page 60 of the instant writ petition being, a copy of the representation dated 18.11.2024

4. Attention of this Court is further drawn to the copy of the representation as has been annexed at page 46 of the instant writ petition

5. It is submitted by Mr. Bhattacharya that by the said two representations, it has been brought to the notice of the respondent authorities that in the event, the proposed boundary wall is permitted to be constructed for the District Mass Education and Literacy Department, the pathway, as has been used by the villagers of the nearby villages, would be obstructed and in that event, they have to avail an alternative pathway, which would be much inconvenient since the same would be much more lengthy

6. It is, thus, submitted that the writ petitioners are entitled to the reliefs, as prayed for

7. It is further argued by Mr. Bhattacharya that in the exception to the report of the respondent no.4 it has been specifically pleaded by the petitioner that while disposing the representation of the writ petitioner, no opportunity of hearing was given to the writ petitioner and/or their authorized representative. Such contention, is, however, vehemently opposed on behalf of the respondent/State

8. Drawing attention to the report dated 13.01.2025, as submitted by the Additional District Magistrate (Dev.), Purulia, it is argued on behalf of the State that on the basis of the representation of the writ petitioner and pursuant to the earlier order of a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court dated 12.12.2024 passed in connection with W.P.A. (P) 485 of 2024 [Bijoy Mahato Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.], ample opportunity was given to the writ petitioner not only for attending the hearing but also at the time of conducting survey

9. It is further submitted that the Additional District Magistrate (Dev.), Purulia on the basis of the survey report and after giving due chance of hearing to all the stake holders came to a finding that the State Welfare Home, Purulia has constructed a destitute home in the plot of land being, Plot No.1058 in Mouza – Gopalpur, which is a Government land and recorded in Khatian No.1 and further the construction of boundary wall on the self-same land has already been completed

10. It is further submitted that in view of the completion of the construction of the boundary wall on the land of the Government, the instant writ petition has become infructuous

11. It is further submitted that before the Additional District Magistrate concerned, the writ petitioner has failed to substantiate that the land over which the partition boundary wall has been constructed, has been recorded as a pathway

12. To substantiate his contention, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent authority, draws our attention of this Court to the copies of the L.R. Records, as have been annexed with the instant r