Calcutta High Court
WPLRT/145/2026 of SUBHAS PATRA AND ORS. Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 24 August 2026
J(2) In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present: The Hon’ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya And The Hon’ble Justice Sandip Kumar De WPLRT 145 of 2026 Subhas Patra and others Vs. The State of West Bengal and others For the petitioners : Mr.
Form No. J(2)
In the High Court at Calcutta
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
Present:
The Hon’ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya
And
The Hon’ble Justice Sandip Kumar De
WPLRT 145 of 2026
Subhas Patra and others
Vs.
The State of West Bengal and others
For the petitioners
:
Mr. Satya Ranjan Kundu
For the State :
Mr. Nikunj Berlia, AGP,
Mr. Pradyat Saha,
Ms. Shreyosi Chakraborty
Heard on
:
24.08.2026
Judgment on
:
24.08.2026
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.:-
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 prayer of the writ petitioners is innocuous.
2. A representation was made by the writ petitioners to the District Land and Land Reforms Officer, Purulia, The Sub-Divisional Land and Land Reforms Officer, Manbazar and the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Puncha seeking correction of the records of rights.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the property has now been recorded erroneously in the name of the Forest Department.
4. The learned Tribunal, while disposing of the application filed by the writ petitioners alleging inaction in deciding the representation, held that the representation was defective and accordingly dismissed the original application. The premise of so holding was inter alia that the appropriate authorities, including the Secretary, Forest Department, had not been impleaded as respondents, nor was the representation given to the appropriate Officers of the Forest Department.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the representation dated March 25, 2019, which is the genesis of the present litigation, was defective on account of omission of the necessary forest authorities, as rightly observed by the learned Tribunal.
6. We find substance in the contention of the State.
7. Accordingly, WPLRT 145 of 2026 is disposed of without interfering with the impugned order dated September 01, 2025 passed by the Fourth Bench of the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal in O.A. 1819 of 2020 (LRTT); however, granting leave to the petitioners to give a fresh representation impleading the appropriate authorities, including the concerned authorities of the Forest Department.
8. If such a representation is given, the said authorities shall decide the same as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law, by a reasoned order, upon giving opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioners, the State as well as the appropriate authorities and any other person who may be interested.
9. It is expected that such exercise shall be concluded within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of giving such representation.
10. There will be no order as to costs.
11. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.
(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.) I agree.
(Sandip Kumar De, J.)
AD-11 TN