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

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

WPA/281/2026

Filing Date

09-06-2026

Registration No

WPA/281/2026

Registration Date

09-06-2026

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

10th June 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Acts & Sections

Article 226 of Constitution of India Section NA

Petitioner(s)

SMTI. ANNAPOORNAM @ POORNAM AND ANR K.BHAWANI, ADARSH ILANGO, DEB KUMAR BAWALI

SHRI. RAMESH

Respondent(s)

THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE AND ANR

THE TEHSILDAR

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE REETOBROTO KUMAR MITRA

10-06-2026

NEW MOTION

Orders

10-06-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE REETOBROTO KUMAR MITRA

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case