Sunday hearing: Calcutta HC halts further demolition of building housing TMC leader Abhishek Banerjee's MP office

The Calcutta High Court on Sunday passed an interim order directing the State authorities to immediately stop further demolition of a property at Amtala housing Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Abhishek Banerjee's Member of Parliament office [Leaps and Bounds Private Limited v. State of West Bengal].

Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury added that this order will operate until the matter is heard next or until the end of July 2026, whichever is earlier.

The interim order was passed after the Court arrived at a prima facie finding that the building's owners may not have been given an adequate opportunity to respond before the demolition was ordered.

"I am of the view that the status quo as regards the nature, character and possession should be maintained till the matter is taken up next or until the end of July 2026, whichever is earlier ... I am of the view that the respondents should desist all further demolition work pursuant to the order passed by the DM/ executive officer, South 24 Parganas dated July 15, 2026," the Court said.

The Court passed the order on writ petition filed by Leaps and Bounds Private Limited, a company associated with Abhishek Banerjee, which owns the building housing the TMC leader's MP office at Diamond Harbour, 24 South Paraganas.

Representing Leaps and Bounds, Senior Advocate Kishore Datta told the Court today that the complaint based on which demolition was ordered was not given to it, nor was any proper opportunity of hearing granted before demolition work started on July 18, Saturday.

He argued that although the authorities claimed the building lacked a sanctioned plan, they failed to follow the mandatory statutory procedure before demolishing it.

Advocate General (AG) Surojit Nath Mitra, for the State, opposed the petition, arguing that it had approached the Court without clean hands and had failed to establish that the construction was authorised.

He submitted that the demolition followed a June 30 notice, which had duly been served on the petitioner.

He added that the writ petition had been listed on extremely short notice, leaving the State with insufficient time to place all records before the Court. The Advocate General sought that the matter be heard by the regular Bench on Monday.

He questioned whether there was any need to invoke the High Court's extraordinary jurisdiction on a holiday.

"Why did you demolish on Saturday then?" asked the judge.

"That is a working day. And notice was on June 30," replied the AG.

"Today right now, lordship is hearing matter, and demolition is still going on," weighed in Kishore, while urging the Court for interim relief.

Senior Advocate Ayan Bhattacharya, appearing for the TMC, supported Datta's submissions.

In his interim order, Justice Chowdhury noted that the demolition decision appeared to have been based on the conclusion that no building sanction had been obtained from the Zilla Parishad, as required under the applicable 2004 Rules.

However, the Court observed that, based on the material presently available, there was nothing to show that the petitioner had been furnished with the complaint or the hearing officer's recommendation, based on which the demolition order was founded, or otherwise afforded an adequate opportunity to respond.

Accordingly, the Court restrained the authorities from carrying out any further demolition for now and directed them to maintain status quo pending further consideration.

The Court, however, declined to grant relief on the petitioner's allegations that political workers and miscreants entered the premises and attempted to loot movable property while the police remained mute spectators.

Observing that these involved disputed factual issues with a possible criminal dimension, and noting that no police complaint had been disclosed in the writ petition, the Court said it was not inclined to pass any order on that aspect at this stage.

[Read Live Coverage]