Debbaran Dutta v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

August 20, 2025 Sl. No.5 Court No.8 s.biswas WPA(P) 165 of 2022 Debbaran Dutta vs.

The State of West Bengal and others Mr. Supriya Ranjan Ghosh Mr. Jayabrata Mukherjee ... for the petitioner Mr. Amitabrata Roy, GP Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee Ms. Munmun Ganguly Mr. Amrita Lal Chatterjee ... for the State Mr. Soumya Ray Ms. Anwesha Saha Mr. Pramit Panda ... for the respondent no.12

1. Mr. Supriya Ranjan Ghosh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Soumya Ray, learned counsel for the respondent no.12 are present.

2. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.

3. Learned counsel for the State drew our attention to para VII page 7 of the report dated 8th August, 2022, which reads as follows:

"Vii. The BL&LRO, Chanditala-II has already issued notices under the provision of section 4C(5) of WBLR Act, 1955 to such recorded raiyats including the private respondent no.12, pertaining to LR Plot Nos.5079 & 5079/5544 of Mouza-Janai, JL No.-57, for the unauthorized conversion of recorded water body and to restore the same to its original position."

4. When this was brought to the notice of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the private

respondent, they agreed that the proceedings initiated by concerned BL&LRO, Chanditala-II under Section 4C(5) of the WBLR Act, 1955 are still pending and this PIL may be disposed of by directing the State authority to take the said proceedings to a logical end expeditiously. In that event, parties agreed that all affected persons may be heard by the State authority before taking a final decision.

5. In view of consensus arrived at, the PIL is disposed of by direction the BL&LRO, ChanditalaII to conclude the proceedings initiated under Section 4C(5) of the WBLR Act, expeditiously preferably within 90 days from the date of production of the copy of this order.

6. Needless to emphasise that the said authority shall take decision in accordance with law after hearing all the concerned parties.

7. The PIL is disposed of without expressing any opinion on merits of the case.

(Sujoy Paul, J.) (Smita Das De, J.)