The Calcutta High Court has directed the State to reconstruct the entire building within two years, which was demolished exceeding their legal authority during an eviction drive.

The Court also directed the authorities to provide free alternative accommodation to the petitioners in the interim, and pay ₹10,00,000 in compensation.

The Bench of Justice Partha Sarathi Sen directed, "The respondent no.2 is hereby directed to construct a new building for the writ petitioners in accordance with sanction plan as has been annexed as Annexure P-19 in the supplementary affidavit dated 10th March, 2026 to its fullest extent positively within two years from the date of communication of the server copy of the judgment and to give possession thereof to the writ petitioners soon thereafter...The time limits for completion of construction of the building by the respondent no.2 authority and to give possession is peremptory and mandatory."

Advocate Kallol Kumar Basu appeared for the Petitioners, while JSC Lokenath Chatterjee appeared for the Respondents

Brief Facts of the Case

A writ petition was filed seeking directions to the respondent authorities to pay compensation for the alleged demolition of the entire building of the Petitioners, with a further prayer for a declaration that the demolition of the entire building of the writ petitioners was illegal and not in accordance with law.

The jurisdictional Executive Engineer initiated proceedings under Section 10(2) of the West Bengal Highways Act, 1964 ("the Act"), and ordered the removal of encroachments over plots of Mouza-Maishali based on inspection and demarcation reports submitted by the Block Land & Land Reforms Officer.

Upon the petitioners' failure to vacate the premises, proceedings under Section 10(3) of the Act were initiated before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, which the petitioners challenged in a previously filed writ and obtained an ad-interim stay; however, in an intra-court appeal preferred by the private respondents, the Division Bench of the Court took note of the State's compliance report confirming the demolition of unauthorized structures on the plot and disposed of the appeal while granting liberty to the present petitioners to approach the appropriate forum regarding their claim of excess demolition. 

Contentions of the Parties

The Petitioners submitted that after obtaining sanction plan from the local Gram Panchayat authority, a two-storied commercial building was constructed and further, the writ petitioner no.2 was carrying on his business in the said building. 

It was argued that by the order of the Division Bench the said encroachment was removed fully from the plot nos.1 and 2. However, at the same time, the respondent authorities exceeded their limit by carrying out the demolition process in the other plot as well.

The State submitted that the writ petitioners miserably failed to produce a single scrap of paper to substantiate that, while undertaking the demolition process as per the direction of the Division Bench of the Court, the respondent authorities have exceeded their limits.

Observations/Findings of the Court

The Court noted that the attendance sheet revealed that in the said demolition process not only encroachment over plot nos.1 and 2 was removed but also construction of the writ petitioners over LR Plot was also removed.

The Court concluded that as per the materials placed before it, supported by sufficient evidence, the respondent authorities have exceeded their limit by dismantling and/or demolishing the construction of the writ petitioners as existed over LR Plot.

The Court also directed, "Since the property of the writ petitioners has been demolished by the respondent authorities without any lawful authority, the respondent no.2 authority shall arrange alternative accommodation of the writ petitioners preferably in the same locality free of cost till they complete the construction and handover possession thereof to the writ petitioners."

The Authorities were also asked to pay compensation of Rs. 10 Lacs to the Petitioners.

Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed.

Cause Title: Kabita Manna & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Ors. [WPA/22289/2025]

Appearances:

Petitioners: Advocates Kallol Kumar Basu, Nilanjan Pal, Sabyasachi Mondal, A.S. Fazlul Karim, Sarthak Dey and Payel Khanra

Respondents: JSC Lokenath Chatterjee, Advocates Mary Datta, Amrita Lal Dhar, Rhitam Chatterjee and Jagannath Chatterjee

Click here to read/download the Judgment

Tags: