1 ORDER SHEET WBCHCA0449402026 Item No.1 RP IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA(P)/437/2026 SRI KRISHNADAS BHATTACHARYYA Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. Appearance: Mr. Biswarup Chatterjee Mr. Pritam Sarkar ...Advocate for the Writ Petitioner Mr. Debyendra Narayan Roy, Ld. GP Ms. Susmita Saha Dutta, Ld. AGP Mr. Pratip Mukherjee Mr. Bikash Kumar Srivastav ...Advocate for State Mr. Sanjib Kumar Mal Mr. Gurudas Mitra Mr. Pushan Majumder ...Advocate for Respondent No.10 CORAM: RAVINDRA VITHALRAO GHUGE, CHIEF JUSTICE & ARIJIT BANERJEE, J Date: 16.09.2026 Order (Per Court) : 2 1. Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of the Petitioner is taken on record. 2. We have heard the Learned Advocates for the Petitioner, Private Respondent and the Learned State Counsel on behalf of the State authorities. We have perused the order passed by this Court dated 24.11.2025 in WPA(P) 483 of 2025. We have also perused the order dated 09.06.2026 passed by the Block Land & Land Reforms Officer, Sonarpur, South 24 Parganas. 3. At the very outset, we record that this Petition cannot be treated as a PIL. A dispute of a civil character between private individuals i.e. the Petitioner and Respondent No.10 to 14, was subject matter before the BL & LRO. The said authority has exercised its jurisdiction and has passed the order dated 09.06.2026.

4. The Learned Advocate representing the private Respondent, has tendered a photostat copy of the communication dated 29.07.2026 addressed to the BL & LRO, Sonarpur, South 24 Parganas, along with certain photographs (08 pages). 3 5. Since a private dispute between the private individuals is dealt with by the concerned Revenue Officer and since we are informed that the Respondent private individuals have performed their part of the obligation under the impugned order, the grievance of the Petitioner cannot be entertained. Moreover, the Petitioner now needs to discharge his obligation, as directed under the order dated 09.06.2026, without any delay. 6. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (ARIJIT BANERJEE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE) Chief Justice

1 ORDER SHEET WBCHCA0449402026 Item No.1 RP IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA(P)/437/2026 SRI KRISHNADAS BHATTACHARYYA Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. Appearance: Mr. Biswarup Chatterjee Mr. Pritam Sarkar ...Advocate for the Writ Petitioner Mr. Debyendra Narayan Roy, Ld. GP Ms. Susmita Saha Dutta, Ld. AGP Mr. Pratip Mukherjee Mr. Bikash Kumar Srivastav ...Advocate for State Mr. Sanjib Kumar Mal Mr. Gurudas Mitra Mr. Pushan Majumder ...Advocate for Respondent No.10 CORAM: RAVINDRA VITHALRAO GHUGE, CHIEF JUSTICE & ARIJIT BANERJEE, J Date: 16.09.2026 Order (Per Court) : 2 1. Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of the Petitioner is taken on record. 2. We have heard the Learned Advocates for the Petitioner, Private Respondent and the Learned State Counsel on behalf of the State authorities. We have perused the order passed by this Court dated 24.11.2025 in WPA(P) 483 of 2025. We have also perused the order dated 09.06.2026 passed by the Block Land & Land Reforms Officer, Sonarpur, South 24 Parganas. 3. At the very outset, we record that this Petition cannot be treated as a PIL. A dispute of a civil character between private individuals i.e. the Petitioner and Respondent No.10 to 14, was subject matter before the BL & LRO. The said authority has exercised its jurisdiction and has passed the order dated 09.06.2026.

4. The Learned Advocate representing the private Respondent, has tendered a photostat copy of the communication dated 29.07.2026 addressed to the BL & LRO, Sonarpur, South 24 Parganas, along with certain photographs (08 pages). 3 5. Since a private dispute between the private individuals is dealt with by the concerned Revenue Officer and since we are informed that the Respondent private individuals have performed their part of the obligation under the impugned order, the grievance of the Petitioner cannot be entertained. Moreover, the Petitioner now needs to discharge his obligation, as directed under the order dated 09.06.2026, without any delay. 6. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (ARIJIT BANERJEE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE) Chief Justice