Calcutta High Court
Amit Basu vs The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors on 22 July, 2026
OD-03-05
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IA No: GA/1/2026
WPO/751/2025
Amit Basu
Versus
The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors.
And
IA No: GA/2/2026
WPO/751/2025
Amit Basu
Versus
The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors.
And
IA No: GA/3/2026
WPO/751/2025
Amit Basu
Versus
The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors.
Before:
The Hon'ble Justice RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY
Date: 22nd July 2026
Appearance:
Mr. Jaydip Kar, Sr. Advocate
Ms. Piyali Sengupta, Advocate
Ms. Jhoti Rauth, Advocate
Ms. Nafisa Yasmin, Advocate
for the petitioner
Mr. Srijib Chakaborty, Advocate
Mr. Chhandak Dutta, Advocate
for the applicant
Mr. Gopal Chandra Das, Advocate
for the KMC
Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharyya, Advocate
Mr. Bratin Kr. Dey, Advocate
Mr. Anjana Banerjee, Advocate
Mr. Subhankar Banerjee, Advocate
for the respondent nos. 11-13
1. Challenging the order dated 4th August 2025 passed by the
Executive Engineer (Civil), Borough - I, Kolkata Municipal
2
Corporation, the instant writ petition was filed. When the matter
was taken for consideration on 11th December 2025 this Court was
pleased to pass the following order:
1. Challenging the order dated 4th August, 2025 passed by the Executive
Engineer (Civil), Building Department, Borough-1, the instant writ
petition has been filed.
2. The matter has a chequered history. The petitioner is the owner of
premises nos.16/1A and 16/1B, Nandalal Bose Lane, Kolkata -
700003 (herein referred to as the 'said property') which was originally
owned by one Shibendra Nath Basu. According to the petitioner, the
said Shibendra Nath Basu had transferred the aforesaid property to a
trust by two indentures of trust dated 15th June 1968 and 3rd July
1974. The said Shibendra Nath Basu as settler and his wife Anima
Basu were trustees of the said trust. On the death of the settler and
his wife, the trust came to an end and the property vested in the
petitioner, who is the sole beneficiary under the trust. The said
property comprises of 11 cottahs and 4 chittacks 24 sq. ft. and 11
cottahs and 7 chittacks 17 sq. ft. of land pertaining to premises
nos.16/1A and 16/1B, Nandalal Bose Lane, Kolkata - 700003
respectively. According to the petitioner, the said property comprised
of pucca and kaccha structures which were constructed by the
owners.
3. The petitioner claims that the Thika Controller and the respondent
no.1 wrongfully by treating the said property to be governed by the
provisions of West Bengal Thika Tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation)
Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as 'Thika Tenancy Act') had mutated
the name of Nandalal Bose Lane and the names of Kanhailal Das and
Bijay Krishna Roy and also renumbered as B/16/1A/H/2 and
B/16/1B/H/2, Kolkata, without notice to the petitioner.
4. The petitioner having come to learn with regard to the aforesaid had
challenged such recording. Ultimately, by a judgment and order dated
14th March, 2024 passed by the Division Bench of this court, the order
passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal,
which held that the said property is governed by the provisions of the
Thika Tenancy Act was set aside. Though, a special leave to appeal is
3
pending consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, according to
the petitioner, there is no interim order subsisting in such matter.
5. The petitioner contends that the private respondents without the
notice and consent of the petitioner started illegally constructing on
the said property without any sanctioned building plan. Since the
construction had commenced without any sanction plan, on the basis
of a complaint lodged by the petitioner, the municipality had issued a
notice on 10th October, 2013, under Section 401 of the Kolkata
Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said
Act'). Upon receiving such notice, the private respondents had made
an application for regularizing the aforesaid construction. Records
would reveal that the private respondents, behind the back of the
petitioner had moved a writ petition which was registered as WPO
No.1344 of 2023 (Surajit Biswas vs. The Kolkata Municipal
Corporation), inter alia, in effect, questioning the notice issued under
Section 401 of the said Act on the ground that only minor repair work
was going on, when the above notice was issued. The coordinate
bench of this Court, by an order dated 3rd July, 2023, taking note of
the above and in absence of any other disclosure being made by the
private respondents, was of the view that the Executive Engineer of
the concerned Borough should take consequential steps in the matter
after issuance of the notice under Section 401 to deal with the
unauthorized construction that had been detected in the subject
premises. However, it was also provided that the respondents may
initiate proceedings in accordance with law and conclude the same
after giving opportunity of hearing to all necessary parties. By such
order, it was made clear that if there is no unauthorized construction,
in that event the person responsible shall be permitted to conclude the
construction that is going on. With the above observations, the writ
petition stood disposed of.
6. The petitioner was, however, not put on notice and was completely
unaware with regard to the aforesaid until the time hereinafter
mentioned.
7. In the interregnum, since an illegal construction was going on at the
aforesaid property, the petitioner had moved a writ petition which
was registered as WPO 247 of 2025. By an order dated 26 th June
2025, a Coordinate Bench of this Court, taking note of the case made
4
out by the petitioner that a multi-storeyed building has been
constructed unauthorizedly, directed the municipality to decide on the
petitioner's representation/complaint dated 5 th February, 2025 in
accordance with law. Pursuant to the aforesaid, the Executive
Engineer (Civil), Building Department Borough 1, upon giving
opportunity of hearing to the parties including the petitioner and the
private respondents, had observed, inter alia, as follows:-
"Whereas from the record in respect of the premises no 16/1B,
Nandalal Bose Lane, renumbered as 8/16/18/H/2, Nandalal
Bose Lane, Kolkatu-700003, Ward No: 007, Borough-I of KMC,
it is noted that, this is a case of unauthorized construction
without any sanction plan from KMC. Inspected the aforesaid
premises by this department on 10.05.2023 & found that
construction of R.C.C. column at ground floor is going on
without taking sanctioned/permission from KMC. To stop
progress of unauthorized construction, Notice U/S 401 of KMC
Act 1980 was issued upon P/R and Police Intimation was sent
to the Shyampukur PS on 10.05.2023
Subsequently the matter was placed before higher authority of
KMC and accordingly it was ordered to demolish the entire
unauthorized construction U/S 400(8) of KMC Act 1980.
But during attempting of demolition program on 30.06.2023
someone produce a letter from Amit Gupta, Advocate along
with order passed by Ld. Judge, Bench X, City Civil Court,
Calcutta dated 10.11 2022 vide TS No. 2325 of 2022 where it
ordered that "therefore, considering the urgency, there will be
nothing impediment in allowing the interim relief as sought for
on behalf of the Plaintiff Petitioner for passing an order of
status quo in respect of the suit property as described in the
schedule of the plaint as well in the Schedule of Application for
injunction under order 39 rule 1 & 2 of the CPC as filled by the
Plaintiff Petitioner, so far nature, character and possession are
concerned, as on this date
Accordingly, same is allowed in favour of the Plaintiff Petitioner
and such relief remains effective till the next date.
The said ad interim order dated 10.11.2022 has extended till
14.08.2023 by order of Ld. Judge, Bench X, City Civil Court,
Calcutta dated 15.03.2023. Accordingly as per the said order
vide T.S No. 2325 of 2022 the demolition programme at above
5
mentioned premises was postponed and the matter was been
kept in abeyance.
Also in the meantime P/R Sri Surajit Biswas filed a writ before
Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta vide WPO No. 1344 of 2023 and
accordingly the Hon'ble Court pleased to pass an order on
03.07.2023 directing "...the Executive Engineer of the
concerned Borough is directed to take further consequential
steps in the matter after issuance of the notice under Section
401 to deal with any unauthorized construction that has been
detected at the subject premises
The aforesaid respondent may initiate proceedings on
accordance with law and conclude the same after giving a
reasonable opportunity of hearing to all the necessary
parties....."
As per said order passed by Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta
dated 03.07.2023 a hearing was taken on 15.07.2023 by the
Executive Engineer(C) with prior intimation to all the parties.
During hearing Sri Surajit Biswas (petitioner) was present and
submitted a prayer letter regarding regularization of
unauthorized construction with necessary fees & Charges.
Accordingly in the line of order passed by Hon'ble High Court
at Calcutta dated 03.07.2023 and subsequently considering
the prayer letter of Sri Surajit Biswas (petitioner) dated
15.07.2023 the Executive Engineer (C) ordered to process the
matter U/S 400(1) of KMC Act 1980 read with office circular no.
16 of 2021-2022 of Director General (Building) dated
02.03.2022.
During further inspection on 26.07.2023 in the aforesaid
premises it is found that the P/R(s) have resumed the
construction work defying the Stop Work Notice U/S 401 of
KMC Act 1980 dated 10.05.2023 by construction of R.C.C. slab
at ground, 1 & 2nd floor roof level supported by R.C.C. column
along with brick wall. To stop further progress of unauthorized
construction FIR u/s 401A of KMC Act 1980 was lodged
against P/R on 26.07.2023.
As per order of Executive Engineer(C)/Building/Br-1 notice U/S
400(1) of KMC Act 1980 along with Preci and demand notice for
50% security deposit as per circular 16 of 2021-22 of DG (B)
6
dated 02.03.2022 has issued upon P/R and accordingly the
P/R has deposited the same.
The matter is in the process for hearing before Special Officer
(Building), u/s 400(1) of KMC Act 1980.
ORDER
Considering the above submission and the fact arising out
during hearing, it is ordered that, as the matter is pending for
hearing before Special Officer (Building), u/s 400(1) of KMC Act
1980 for conclusion. We may abide by the decision of the order
of Special Officer (Building).
With this order the matter stands disposed of.
Let this order be communicated to all the parties.”
8. It is from the aforesaid proceeding and the order that the petitioner
has come to learn with regard to the factum of the previous writ
petition being moved by the private respondents, as also with regard
to the factum of the private respondents being called upon to deposit
certain sums towards security deposit for regularization of the
unauthorized construction.
9. Mr. Kar, learned Senior Advocate representing the petitioner would
submit that private respondent by practicing fraud on Court as also on
the petitioner including the municipality at the first instance, had
moved the writ petition behind the petitioner’s back and obtained the
order dated 3rd July, 2023.
10. This court was never made aware that the entire construction was
illegal and that there was a subsisting order under section 400(8) of
the said Act when the order dated 3rd July, 2023 was passed.
According to Mr. Kar, the municipality has permitted the illegal
construction to continue and today, five storied structure is standing
on the said property.
11. Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate appears for the municipality. He is,
however, unable to enlighten this Court as to whether any order
regularizing the aforesaid illegal construction has been passed.
12. The private respondents are represented. In response to a query from
the Court, the learned advocate representing the private respondents
would submit that the private respondents have acquired interest in
respect of the structure which was in existence by virtue of a deed of
gift dated 21st April 1989. He has also placed before this Court the
7
receipt issued by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation to demonstrate
that in compliance of the directions passed by the municipal authority,
the private respondents had already put in the security deposit and
other charges for regularization of the unauthorized construction. Let
copies of the above documents be taken on record.
13. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.
Prima facie, I find that the private respondents are not the owner of
the property in question, however, the claim of the private
respondents is in relation to a particular structure which admittedly
even on the own saying of the private respondents is no longer in
existence since, a new structure has come up. It is also an admitted
position that the new construction that has come up at the said
property is illegal as does not have the sanction of the municipal
authorities and has been constructed on the teeth of a notice issued
under section 401 as also of an order passed under section 400(8) of
the said Act. I find from the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench
dated 3rd July, 2023 that the co-ordinate Bench had only permitted
continuation of construction provided there was no unauthorized
construction in the said premises. Thus, the said order read with the
observations made by the Executive Engineer as appearing at internal
page 4 of the order dated 4th August, 2025 would in no uncertain
terms indicate that at the time of inspection by the department on 10 th
May, 2023, the construction that was noted, was of on RCC column at
the ground floor of the said property. Obviously, even at that stage,
the municipal authorities were certain that there was no sanction plan
and, as such, in terms of the directive issued by the co-ordinate Bench
dated 3rd July, 2023, the municipal authorities ought not to have
permitted the person responsible to continue with further construction.
The construction that has come up is on the teeth of the order
restraining further illegal construction at least the same is apparent
from the orders passed by this Court and the order dated 4 th August,
2025.
14. Having regard thereto, and noting from the parties that the building is
yet to be completed and only super structure is complete, I am of the
view that at this stage, the municipal authorities should not permit
any further construction in the said premises and that none should
occupy the said property without express leave of this Court. The
8
concerned Executive Engineer, Borough-1 is directed to inspect the
said property. The municipal authority shall carry out inspection upon
prior notice to the learned Advocates-on-record of the respective
parties who shall also be entitled to accompany the Executive
Engineer.
15. The executive engineer shall take photographs of the building from all
corners and prepare a detailed inventory. Let such report be filed
before this Court on or before the matter is taken up next.
16. If a requisition is made by the municipal authorities for police
assistance, the officer-in-charge of the local police station shall
provide necessary adequate assistance.
17. It is, however, made clear that pending disposal of the writ petition,
no decision should be taken by the authority to regularize the illegal
construction.
18. The interim order shall continue till the end of January, 2026 or until
further orders whichever is earlier.
19. List this matter in the month list of January, 2026.
2. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the municipality had carried out
inspection at premises no.B/16/IB/H/2, Nandalal Bose Lane, Ward
– 7, Kolkata, Borough – I, incidentally the inventory report filed by
the municipality showed that the building had been completed and
24 flats had been constructed. Out of the aforesaid flats, save and
except four flats being flat nos.A3, A4, A6 and D2, all other flats are
shown to be occupied.
3. Noting from the submissions made by the learned advocate
representing the municipality that no occupancy certificate had
been issued as yet, this Court had directed the municipality to take
appropriate steps by issuing notices on the persons who are
occupying the flats, as detailed in the inspection/inventory report,
disclosing their authority to occupy the flats without the occupancy
certificate.
9
4. Since then, there has been further development in the matter. Not
only some occupiers in the premises in question have approached
this Court by filing intervention application, the municipality has
also proceeded in the matter in terms of the order passed by the
coordinate Bench on 3rd July 2023 in WPO/1344/2023 and upon
hearing the occupants had passed an order on 11 th March 2026.
The petitioner has brought the aforesaid fact to the notice of this
Court by filing a supplementary affidavit.
5. Having regard to the disclosure made and noting from the
submissions of some of the occupiers who are applicants that an
appeal has been filed before the municipality Building Tribunal from
the order passed by the Special Officer (Building) dated 11 th March
2026 in demolition case no.016-B/I/23-24 in respect of the
premises no. B/16/IB/H/2, Nandalal Bose Lane, Ward – 7, Kolkata,
Borough – I and that such appeal is yet to be admitted, having
regard to the delay involved, I am of the view that nothing survives
in the writ petition.
6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
7. The applications being IA No.GA/1/2026, IA No.GA/2/2026 IA
No.GA/3/2026 are also disposed of.
(RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY, J.)
R. Bose
