SMTI. ANNAPOORNAM @ POORNAM AND ANR K.BHAWANI, ADARSH ILANGO, DEB KUMAR BAWALI vs THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE AND ANR — WPA/281/2026
Case under Article 226 of Constitution of India Section NA. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 10th June 2026.
CNR: WBCHCP0005502026
Filing Number
WPA/281/2026
Filing Date
09-Jun-2026
Registration No
WPA/281/2026
Registration Date
09-Jun-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Justice Reetobroto Kumar Mitra
Coram
Hon'ble Justice Reetobroto Kumar Mitra
Bench Type
SINGLE BENCH
Category
GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )
Sub-Category
Miscellaneous ( 16 )
Judicial Branch
Judicial Section
Decision Date
10-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 11-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SMTI. ANNAPOORNAM @ POORNAM AND ANR K.BHAWANI, ADARSH ILANGO, DEB KUMAR BAWALI
-
2.SHRI. RAMESH
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE AND ANR
-
2.THE TEHSILDAR
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Justice Reetobroto Kumar MitraView PDF
Case Summary: WPA/281/2026 The High Court at Calcutta (Port Blair Bench) set aside an order dated March 30, 2026 directing petitioners to remove their cow shed due to alleged nuisance. While the court found no ploy to evict the petitioners (contrary to their claims), it ruled the magistrate failed to comply with mandatory procedural requirements under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—specifically, conducting proper inspection, collecting evidence, and providing a hearing before executing the nuisance abatement order. The court allowed the petition but permitted authorities to reassess the conditional order if proper statutory benchmarks are followed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Jun-2026
New Motion
Hon'ble Justice Reetobroto Kumar Mitra
-
09-Jun-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WPA/281/2026
Case Summary: WPA/281/2026 The High Court at Calcutta (Port Blair Bench) set aside an order dated March 30, 2026 directing petitioners to remove their cow shed due to alleged nuisance. While the court found no ploy to evict the petitioners (contrary to their claims), it ruled the magistrate failed to comply with mandatory procedural requirements under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—specifically, conducting proper inspection, collecting evidence, and providing a hearing before executing the nuisance abatement order. The court allowed the petition but permitted authorities to reassess the conditional order if proper statutory benchmarks are followed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts