Mantu Sil v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

04.08.2025 Sl. No. 42.

M/L.

Mithun Ct.No.42.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA 24266 of 2023 Mantu Sil Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Dilip Kumar Chatterjee, Mr. Mrinmoy Bhattacharyya, Ms. Ritabar Sarkar ...for the petitioner.

Mr. Santanu Kumar Mitra, Sr. Govt. Adv., Mr. Amartya Pal ...for the State.

Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.

The petitioner contends that the predecessor-ininterest of the petitioner, namely, his father Nemai Chandra Sil owned and possessed 5 sataks of land out of 26 decimals under classification 'Doba', comprised within Dag No.4688, Khatian No.1546/2, J.L. No.06, Mouza-Rajbalhat, Police Station Jangipara, DistrictHooghly. The private respondent no.8 is a co-sharer in the property and has filled up the 'Doba' without the permission of the concerned authority. On 27th July, 2023, the petitioner made a representation before the Block Development Officer, respondent no.6 for redressal of his grievance. However, no steps have been taken, hence this writ petition.

Mr. Dilip Kumar Chatterjee, learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the matter be sent to the

Block Development Officer for consideration of the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. Since the State is unrepresented, Mr. Santanu Kumar Mitra, learned Senior Government Advocate, who usually appears on behalf of the State, is requested to appear in this matter. Let the appointment of Mr. Mitra be regularized by the concerned authority.

Petitioner is directed to serve a copy of this writ petition along with its annexure upon Mr. Mitra, learned advocate for the State.

Despite service, none appears on behalf of the Pradhan, respondent no.7 and private respondent no.8. Upon hearing the learned Advocates for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Block Development Officer, respondent no.6 to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 27th July, 2023, upon notice to all interested parties including the petitioner and respondent no.8 by a reasoned order in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order. The reasoned order shall be communicated to the petitioner within a period of one week thereof. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of this writ petition.

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

The learned Advocate for the petitioner is directed to communicate this order to respondent no.6, Block Development Officer, along with copy of the representation dated 27th July, 2023.

With the above direction, the writ petition being WPA 24266 of 2023 stands disposed of.

All connected applications, if any, stand disposed of.

There will be, however, no order as to costs. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

All concerned parties shall act in terms of the copy of the order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Bivas Pattanayak, J.)