Calcutta High Court
WPA(P)/280/2026 of DUKHIRAM HALDER Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 29 September 2026
No.1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.D/L.9 CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION Saikat APPELLATE SIDE Mukherjee WPA(P)/ 280 /202 6 DUKHIRAM HALDER ]… Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS ]… Respondents Appearance: Mr. Satadal Sovan Halder, Advocate for the
Ct. No.1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Item No.D/L.9 CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
Saikat APPELLATE SIDE
Mukherjee
WPA(P)/
/202
DUKHIRAM HALDER
]… Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS
]… Respondents
Appearance:
Mr. Satadal Sovan Halder, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. D. N. Ray, G.P. with Mr. Guddu Singh, Mr. Sourav Haldar, Mr. Gourav Sarkar and Ms. Diya Chakraborty, Advocates for the Respondent-State
CORAM
:
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, CJ.
&
OM NARAYAN RAI, J.
DATE
:
29th September, 2026.
ORDER (Per Court)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The Petitioner claims to be an interested villager. According to him, the writ land measures about 26 sataks and 44 sataks, respectively. The predecessor-in-interest was one late Subodh Gopal Basu and after his demise, no names are recorded in the Revenue records. Plot no.333 was being utilised by the villagers as a pathway and the plot no.312/2072 was being used as Seva Puja.
2. A Report by way of an affidavit has been filed by Mr. Sajal Malakar, Block Land & Land Revenue Officer, Mandir Bazar, wherein it is stated on the basis of the records and sketch map that the deceased Subodh Gopal Basu was the sole recorded tenant in respect of R.S. Khatian no.632 and 26 decimal of land at plot no.333, was clasified as Debasthan with the noting in the remarks column as ‘Jatayater jonno sadharoner byaboharjyo’ and ‘Hindu sadharoner byaboharjyo’ against plot no.312/2072. It is further stated that a school by name Pranabananda Vidya Mandir with a brick compound wall has been in operation for teaching students up to class-IV. Some local families reside on the Western part of the plot and they use the front side road of the plot for their egress and ingress. As such, there are two temples available and one school on the writ land. The Petitioner’s contention is that the villagers are not getting ingress and egress because of the above developments.
3. In view of the above, we do not find that this Petition could be treated as a PIL and could be entertained. The PIL is disposed off.
4. In the event, the Petitioner desires to approach the Revenue authorities for seeking creation of a road, all contentions of all the parties are kept open. (Om Narayan Rai, J.) (Ravindra V. Ghuge) Chief Justice