JUDGMENT Khare, C.J. : The petitioners in Civil Order No. 11070(W) of 1996 are residing within the municipal limits of Joynagar-Majilpur Municipality within the district of 24-Parganas (South). It is within that municipal limit of Joynagar-Majilpur Municipality there is a pond situated at Mouza-Majilpur, J.L. No. 19, Khatian Nos. 4460, 4203, Dag No. 383 measuring 60 decimals. This pond is claimed to be owned by the respondent Nos. 11 and 12 in the writ petition who are the appellants in the instant appeal along with other co-sharers. The writ petitioners further allege that there is a temple adjacent to the pond and the residents of the neighbouring area are visiting the temple as well as taking water from the said pond. It appears that the appellant Sirajuddin Sk. i.e. the respondent No. 11 of the writ petition who claims to be one of the owners of the said pond proceeded with the construction after filling up a portion of the said pond. At this stage the writ petitioners came before this Court by means of filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for cancellation of the building plan alleged to be sanctioned in favour of the Sirajuddin and Others and further injuncting them from proceeding with the construction and also for demolition of the construction already made by them. 2. Learned Single Judge entertained the above writ petition and passed an ad interim order of injunction whereby the learned Judge restrained the owners from proceeding with the construction over the said pond. Subsequently the learned Single Judge was of the opinion that this matter relates to environment and pollution and as such directed the writ petition (Civil Order No. 11070(W) of 1996) to be placed before the Bench dealing with pollution and environmental matter. That is how the writ petition has come up before us. 3. The instant appeal filed by Sirajuddin and Ors. is directed against the interim order of injunction dated 24th February, 1997 passed by the learned Single Judge in the aforesaid Civil Order No. 11070(W) of 1996. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants in the appeal urged that since this is a private pond, the appellants have obtained permission for construction of building over the said pond. The learned judge has incorrectly passed an Interim order of injunction. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants in the appeal urged that since this is a private pond, the appellants have obtained permission for construction of building over the said pond. The learned judge has incorrectly passed an Interim order of injunction. Learned Counsel for the appellants further brought to our notice a judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of this Court in a writ petition filed by the appellants and the same was numbered as Civil Order No. 11713(W) of 1996. In that writ petition the writ petitioners in Civil Order No. 11070(W) of 1996 i.e. the respondent Nos. 1 to 51 in the instant appeal were not made parties. In their absence learned Single Judge passed a conditional order. On the strength of this judgment, learned Counsel urged that since this judgment is not appealed against, the same has become final and no contrary order could have been passed by this Court in a separate petition filed by the writ petitioners of Civil Order No. 11070(W) of 1996. 5. On the other hand learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioners in Civil Order No. 11070(W) of 1996 urged that the writ petitioners in Civil Order No. 11070(W) of 1996 who are the respondent Nos. 1 to 51 in the instant appeal have not been made parties. In the writ petition (Civil Order No. 11713(W) of 1996) filed by Sirajuddin Seikh and Ors. who are the appellants in the instant appeal and as such any order passed thereon does not bind the them. 6. Section 4C of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 provides that a raiyat holding any land may apply to the Collector for change of area or character of such land or for conversion of the same for any purpose other than the purpose for which it was settled or was being previously used or for alteration in the mode of use of such land. The appellants Sirajuddin Seikh and Ors. claim that the disputed plot is a private pond whereas the residents of the area who are the writ petitioners in Civil Order No.11070(W) of 1996 claimed that the residents have easementry right over the said pond. The appellants Sirajuddin Seikh and Ors. claim that the disputed plot is a private pond whereas the residents of the area who are the writ petitioners in Civil Order No.11070(W) of 1996 claimed that the residents have easementry right over the said pond. Assuming what the appellants Sirajuddin Seikh and Ors claim is correct, nonetheless they cannot undertake any construction nor the Municipal authorities can sanction the plan for construction of a building over the pond without an express permission under Section 4C of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955. Admittedly, no permission has been obtained under Section 4C of the Act and as such we are of the opinion that the alleged owners of the said pond are not entitled to convert the user of f the said pond by making construction over it. 7. We, therefore, dispose of the writ petition (C.O. No 11070(W) of 1996) and the appeal with the direction that the appellants Sirajuddin Seikh and Ors, are restrained from making any construction over the disputed pond without permission as required under Section 4C of the Act, treating the writ petition and the appeal as on day's list for hearing. There will be no order as to costs. Let xerox certified copy of the order be handed over to the parties within a week from the date of receipt of the file, if applied for. Ghosh, J.: I agree