SHRI.V.RAVICHANDRAN G.BINNU KUMAR, MANISHA MONDAL, VINITA DEVI vs SHRI.SANDEEP SINGH AND ORS — MAT/69/2026

Case under Appeal Under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 23rd April 2026.

CNR: WBCHCP0003382026

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

MAT /69/2026

Filing Date

27-03-2026

Registration No

MAT /69/2026

Registration Date

27-03-2026

Judge

HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA , HON'BLE JUSTICE SMITA DAS DE

Coram

HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA , HON'BLE JUSTICE SMITA DAS DE

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )

Sub-Category

Miscellaneous ( 16 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

23rd April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

APPEAL UNDER CLAUSE 15 OF LETTERS PATENT Section NA

Petitioner(s)

SHRI.V.RAVICHANDRAN G.BINNU KUMAR, MANISHA MONDAL, VINITA DEVI

Respondent(s)

SHRI.SANDEEP SINGH AND ORS

THE SECRETARY

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA , HON'BLE JUSTICE SMITA DAS DE

13-04-2026

FOR ADMISSION

23-04-2026

FOR ORDERS

22-04-2026

FOR ADMISSION

21-04-2026

FOR ADMISSION

20-04-2026

FOR ADMISSION

Orders

23-04-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA,HON'BLE JUSTICE SMITA DAS DE

The High Court at Calcutta allowed the appeal and expunged prejudicial observations made by the Single Judge that the demolition order "shall stand affirmed" upon dismissal of appeal, finding such observations constituted improper merit-based findings when the case should have been relegated to the statutory appellate authority. The court directed the statutory authority to independently decide the appeal on its merits within 12 weeks without being influenced by any prior observations, clarifying that the court had expressed no opinion on the demolition order's legality. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court at Calcutta allowed the appeal and expunged prejudicial observations made by the Single Judge that the demolition order "shall stand affirmed" upon dismissal of appeal, finding such observations constituted improper merit-based findings when the case should have been relegated to the statutory appellate authority. The court directed the statutory authority to independently decide the appeal on its merits within 12 weeks without being influenced by any prior observations, clarifying that the court had expressed no opinion on the demolition order's legality. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case