Ashim Mondal vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Debangsu Basak, J.:-

Appeals are directed against order dated August 6, 2026 passed in WPA 18611 of 2026, WPA 18612 of 2026 and WPA 18609 of 2026.

By the impugned orders, learned Single Judge directed disconnection of electricity to the subject premises after noticing that the entire construction is illegal.

The writ petitions are yet to be disposed of.

The appeals are specially assigned to this Bench by the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice by the order dated August 8, 2026.

In the midst of hearing of a continuing appeals, learned advocate appearing for the appellants mentioned the appeals for early consideration in view of the eminent threat of demolition. According to him, bulldozers are waiting for demolition of the structures belonging to his clients.

In view of such plea of urgency being made out, we permitted the learned advocate for the appellants to address us on the merits of the appeals after requesting the learned advocate appearing for the continuing appeal to allow the hearing of the present appeals.

Learned advocate appearing for the appellants submits that the subject land over which the constructions stand erected is not a water body. In support of his contention that subject land is not a water body, our attention is not drawn to any document or materials on record to substantiate the same.

In response to a query of the Court with regard to the order to remove illegal construction restoring the land to its original character passed in terms of Section 11 of the East Kolkata Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Act, 2006, learned advocate appearing for the appellants submits that his limits were kept in the dark with regard thereto.

Materials made available on record establish that the land in question is a water body. There subsists an order passed in August 2022 under Section 11 of the Act of 2006 requiring the removal of the illegal construction and restoration of the land to its original character.

Learned Single Judge gave reasons for arriving at the conclusion of unauthorized and illegal construction. Learned Single Judge also gave reasons for arriving at the conclusion that the land in question was a water body over which the illegal construction was raised.

In course of hearing of the appeals, we enquired of the learned advocate appearing for the appellants as to whether or not the appellants require time to remove the offending structures. In response to such query, no affirmative answer is given to the Court.

In view of the discussions above, we find no merit in the present appeals.

M.A.T. 1321 of 2026, M.A.T. 1322 of 2026 and M.A.T. 1323 of 2026 are dismissed without any order as to costs.

In view of the dismissal of the appeals, all the three connected applications being CAN 1 of 2026 are disposed of.

At this stage, learned advocate appearing for the appellants seeks four hours time to remove the offending structures.

Considering such prayer, the appellants may remove the offending structures in course of the day.

I agree