WPA/8684/2026 of AYUB ALI PANDIT Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 28 September 2026

1. The parties to the instant writ petition are represented by their respective learned counsel.

2. On perusal of the earlier order dated 21.04.2026, it appears to this Court that a Coordinate Bench requested the learned advocate for the respondent State to ascertain as to which statute will apply for removal of encroachment from the land as owned by the District Board, which is the subject matter of the instant writ petition, since by issuing a memo dated 24.03.2025, the jurisdictional Sub-divisional Magistrate– Tehatta, District – Nadia communicated the Additional District Magistrate, Nadia Zilla Parishad that he is not the competent authority to remove the unauthorized encroachment from the suit land since he has received a communication from the Assistant Engineer, Plassey Highway Division, P.W.R. that the land in question is recorded in favour of the District Board.

3. At this juncture, this Court proposes to look to the order dated 04.12.2024 as passed by another Coordinate Bench in WPA 19611 of 2024 (Ayub Ali Pandit v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.) wherein on the basis of the pleading of the writ petitioner that an encroachment took place over the PWD’s Road, the said Coordinate Bench directed the SDO to remove encroachment from the land in question, in the event, while passing reasoned order he found that really encroachment is there.

4. Coming back to the factual aspect as involved in the instant writ petition, it appears that it is the specific case of the writ petitioner that contiguous to the writ petitioner’s land, particulars of which has been mentioned in paragraph 5 of the writ petition there is a Government Land as has been encroached by the private respondents, as a result whereof, the writ petitioner’s access to the said land in Dag No.226 in Mouza – Hanspukuria in District – Nadia has been obstructed.

5. At this juncture, this Court proposes to look to the definition of Public Land under Section 2(7) of the Public Land (Eviction of unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1962 which reads as under: - “2(7) "public land" means any land belonging to, or taken or lease by, the State Government, a local authority, a Government company or a corporation owned or controlled by the Central or the State Government and includes any land requisitioned by, or on behalf of, the State Government, but does not include a Government road or a highway with the meaning of the Bengal Highways Act, 1925, or any other law for the time being in force on the subject.”

6. It thus, appears to this Court that a Public Land includes a land belonging to the local authority also. Since the land in question is recorded in the name of the Nadia Zilla Parishad, this Court has no hesitation to hold in absence of any opposition that the said land comes under the purview of “Public Land” within the meaning of the said Act.

7. It appears to this Court that by way of a representation dated 11.03.2026, the writ petitioner requested the SDO, Tehatta to remove such encroachment, however, no action has been taken as yet.

8. In view of such, this Court directs the respondent no.6 authority to initiate a proceeding under Section 3 of the said Act and after serving due notice to the writ petitioner, the private respondents and/or any other stakeholder and after giving them opportunity of hearing as well as to file show cause shall pass a reasoned order on the basis of the representation dated 11.03.2026 soon thereafter.

9. The entire exercise as indicated in the forgoing paragraphs is to be completed by the respondent no.6 authority within forty-five working days from the date of communication of the server cop of this order.

10. It is further directed that, in the event, while passing the reasoned order, the respondent no.6 authority finds sufficient merit in the representation dated 11.03.2026 and/or after considering the cause shown by the alleged encroachers, he finds that the said alleged encroachers are in unauthorized occupation of the said Public Land, he is directed to take all consequential actions under Section 4 of the said Act soon thereafter.

11. With the aforementioned observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of. Liberty is given to the learned advocate-on-record for the writ petitioner to communicate the server copy of this order to the respondent no.6 authority, who is directed to act on the server copy of this order.

12. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

13. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all the necessary formalities. (Partha Sarathi Sen, J.)