Satrughna Singh v. The State Of West Bengal And ORS.

Court No. 2

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side W.P.A. 16223 of 2024 Satrughna Singh VS The State of West Bengal & Ors.

04.12.2024 (Item No. 27) (AB) Mr. Lakshinath Bhattacharya .... For the petitioner Mr. Chandi Charan De, Ld. Addl. Govt. Pleader Ms. Reshma Chatterjee .... For the State Affidavit-of-service, filed in Court today, is taken on record.

Mr.

Lakshinath Bhattacharya, learned advocate appears for the petitioner.

Mr. Chandi Charan Dey, leaned Additional Government Pleader appears for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5, and 8 to 12.

None appears for the rest of the respondents. The petitioner complains of that the local Police Station extended its boundary by encroaching upon the land of the petitioner. The boundary wall of the petitioner has been demolished by the Police Station. Petitioner submitted a representation dated February 28, 2024, annexure P-3 at page 36 to the writ petition.

In view of the above, the respondent No. 9 upon issuing a prior hearing notice of at least seven days to the petitioner and the respondent No. 12 and after granting them an opportunity of hearing shall

consider the said representation dated February 28, 2024, annexure P-3 at page 36 to the writ petition by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law. The entire exercise shall be carried out and completed by the respondent No. 9 positively within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order and the reasoned order shall be communicated to the petitioner and the respondent No. 12 positively within a further period of one week from the date of the said reasoned order to be passed. It is made clear that, this Court has not gone into the merits of this writ petition and the respondent No. 9 shall decide the issue independently in accordance with law.

Depending upon the outcome in the reasoned order parties shall be at liberty to take steps in accordance with law.

This order shall not create any right or equity in favour of the petitioner if he does not succeed to his claim before the respondent No. 9 strictly in accordance with law.

Since affidavits are not called for, the allegations made in this writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents.

With the above observations and directions, this writ petition, WPA 16223 of 2024 stands disposed of, without any order as to costs.

Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished expeditiously.

(Aniruddha Roy, J.)