Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1001 (CAL)

Shibnath Naskar v. State of West Bengal

2016-12-14

SAHIDULLAH MUNSHI

body2016
JUDGMENT : 1. This writ petition has been filed complaining of the inaction on the part of the Executive Engineer, Barasat Highway Division No. I P.W. (Roads) Directorate to remove the encroachment which was made on the government land covering plot nos.148, 149 and 150. Learned Advocate for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to Annexure P-7 at page 59 of this writ petition. The said writ petition was disposed of by an Order dated 7th June, 2011 whereby the respondent no.5 i.e. Inspector-in-Charge, Rajarhat Police Station, Rajarhat, District 24-Parganas (North) to remove the barricade within a specified time which was made on the government land. According to the petitioner the said land pertains to R.S. Dag Nos. 148, 149 and 150. 2. Mr. Subir Pal, led by Mr. Sushovan Sengupta submits that the order passed by this Court on 7th June, 2011 has been duly complied with. He has received instruction from the concerned State respondent i.e. Inspector-in-Charge, Rajarhat Police Station, Bidhannagar Police Commissionerate to the extent that after the order of the Hon’ble Court was communicated the police authority took necessary steps for removal of the barricade made by the private respondent and other anti-social elements. Since the said barricade has already been removed by the police authority and since it is the only prayer of the petitioner for a direction upon the concerned authority to remove the barricade and/or obstruction on the government land in those plots nothing remains to be decided in this writ petition. 3. However, it is submitted by the learned Advocate for the private respondent that so far as plot nos. 148 and 149 he is not concerned at all. He has got some interest in plot no. 150 and which is involved in a Civil Suit in between the parties. I make no observation with regard to such pending suit and the same will be decided in accordance with the rights of the parties. 4. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. 5. The report submitted by Mr. Pal, learned Advocate for the State, is taken on record.