Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2026 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. Calcutta High Court/
  4. 2024/
  5. January

The Managing Director ,w.b. Highway Development Corporation Ltd. vs. Sudharani Mondal and Ors

Decided on 31 January 2024• Citation: MAT/60/2024• Calcutta High Court
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                    31.01.2024                                                      
                    Item No.14.                                                     
                    Court No.6.                                                     
                      AB                                                            
                                              M.A.T. 60 of 2024                     
                                                    With                            
                                                CAN 1 of 2024                       
                                                CAN 2 of 2024                       
                                      The Managing Director, West Bengal            
                                     Highway Development Corporation Ltd.           
                                                     Vs                             
                                          Sudharani Mondal & Others                 
                                     Mr. Anirban Ray, ld. GP,                       
                                     Mr. Tanay Chakraborty ….for the Appellant.     
                                     Mr. Mukul Biswas,                              
                                     Mr. Pradip Pal …..for the Respondent No.1/     
                                                              Writ Petitioner.      
                                     In re : IA CAN 1 of 2024                       
                                     This is an application for condonation of delay of
                                178 days in filing the appeal. Causes shown being   
                                sufficient, the delay is condoned.                  
                                     I A CAN 1 of 2024 is, accordingly, disposed of.
                                     In re : MAT 60 of 2024, IA CAN 2 of 2024       
                                     This appeal is directed against a judgment and 
                                order dated June 12, 2023, whereby the writ petition
                                of the respondent no.1 herein, being WPA 5328 of    
                                2023, was disposed of by a learned Judge of this    
                                Court.                                              
                                     It appears that  the writ  petitioner had      
                                approached the learned Single Judge with a grievance
                                that there has  been  illegal encroachment on       
                                Government land under the control of the West Bengal

                                                      2                             
                                Highway  Development Corporation Limited, the       
                                present appellant.                                  
                                     The learned Judge noted that in an earlier writ
                                petition filed by the present writ petitioner being WPA
                                3430 of 2021, a learned Judge by an order dated     
                                September 2, 2021, as modified on September 27,     
                                2022, had directed the concerned Authority to dispose
                                of the application filed by the writ petitioner within a
                                stipulated period after observing the principles of 
                                natural justice.                                    
                                     Pursuant to such order, the appellant by an    
                                order dated 07.11.2022 recorded that there are      
                                occupants on Government land for the past 15 years  
                                and there is no reason to remove such occupants till
                                the land is required by the Government.             
                                     The learned Judge disposed of the writ petition
                                with the following observations and directions:     
                                          “It is strange to note that though the concerned
                                     authority found illegal encroachment on Government land,
                                     he refrained from removing such encroachment for reasons
                                     best known to him which may in all probability be
                                     extraneous in nature. Such a decision is not only ridiculous,
                                     but is also unknown to law.                    
                                          In view of the above, this Court is inclined to hold
                                     that since encroachment upon Government land has been
                                     found by the authority, the concerned authority, being the
                                     2nd respondent herein, is directed to take necessary steps
                                     for removal of such encroachment within one month from
                                     the date of communication of this order upon affording
                                     reasonable opportunity of hearing to all the interested
                                     persons including the petitioner, in accordance with law.”

                                                      3                             
                                     Being aggrieved, the respondent no.2 in the writ
                                petition has come up by way of this appeal.         
                                     Learned Government Pleader appearing for the   
                                appellant says that it was not proper on the part of the
                                learned Single Judge to come to a finding that there is
                                encroachment on Government land and  to direct      
                                removal of such encroachment. The learned Judge     
                                ought to have directed that proper procedure be     
                                followed under the West Bengal Highway Act, 1964.   
                                     There may be some substance in the submission  
                                of learned Government Pleader. However, we find that
                                the order of the learned Single Judge has been carried
                                out by  the Competent Authority and, therefore,     
                                nothing remains in this appeal. This appeal has     
                                become academic. We, however, leave it open for the 
                                appellant herein or the State to argue in an        
                                appropriate case that for removal of encroachment   
                                from Government land, the relevant procedure laid   
                                down in the concerned Statues should be followed.   
                                     Learned Government Pleader says that the       
                                observation of the learned Judge that the concerned 
                                Authority, in spite of finding illegal encroachment on
                                Government land, refrained from removing such       
                                encroachment “for reasons best known to him which   
                                may in all probability be extraneous in nature”, is 
                                without any basis. We do  not think that such       
                                observation was  required to be  made.  Such        
                                observation stands expunged.                        

                                                      4                             
                                     The appeal and the connected application are,  
                                accordingly, disposed of.                           
                                     Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if
                                applied for, be supplied expeditiously after compliance
                                with all the necessary formalities.                 
                                                            (Arijit Banerjee, J.)   
                                                         (M. V. Muralidaran, J.)