Authority: Calcutta High Court, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction

Order Date: 21 July 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Appellants – Md. Idrish and 51 others (collectively “the appellants”); Respondents – Union of India and Syama Prasad Mookherjee Port (formerly Calcutta Port Trust) along with other port officials.
  • Origin: The appellants filed W.P.A. No.12272 of 2026 challenging a demolition drive initiated by the Port Authority against residential quarters (referred to as CDLB Quarters and CPT Quarters) located at Brooke Lane, Garden Reach, Kolkata.
  • Single Judge’s dismissal (30 June 2026) was based on the appellants’ failure to prove occupation; the court found no admissible evidence from Aadhaar cards, voter IDs, or gas bills.
  • On appeal (M.A.T. No.1072 of 2026), counsel argued that the documents constitute prima facie proof of occupation and that the Port Authority must follow Sections 4 and 5 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 before any demolition.
  • Key statutory references cited:
  • Public Premises Act, 1971 – Sections 2(g), 4(1‑2), 5(1), 5‑A, 5‑B, 5‑C.
  • Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 – Sections 2(k), 2(c), 3(3).
  • Aadhaar (Enrolment and Update) Regulations, 2016 – Regulation 2(d), 7(1), 10, 11, Schedule II (list of address‑proof documents).
  • Evidence on record: 52 appellants; 22 produced Aadhaar cards, the remainder produced gas supply bills, voter identity cards, etc. The Port Authority admitted the buildings comprised 502 residential quarters housing approximately 8,000 residents (letters dated 21 May 2025 and 22 May 2025 from police and port officials).
  • The Port Authority claimed the structures were dilapidated and dangerous, but no municipal demolition notice was produced, and the authority lacked statutory power to demolish under the 1971 Act.
  • The court examined jurisprudence on Aadhaar as proof of address (Debashis Nandy (2018), Parvati Kumar (2019), Association for Democratic Reforms (2026)) and concluded that while Aadhaar is not conclusive proof, it is sufficient as prima facie evidence of occupation for purposes of the 1971 Act.
  • The court clarified the two‑stage process under the 1971 Act: (i) issuance of a show‑cause notice under Section 4, and (ii) eviction order under Section 5 after hearing. Demolition powers under Sections 5‑A to 5‑C apply only to unauthorised constructions, not to authorised structures occupied unlawfully.

Final Outcome

  • The appellate court allowed M.A.T. No.1072 of 2026, restraining the Port Authority from any demolition or eviction of the residential quarters until due process under Sections 4 and 5 of the 1971 Act is observed.
  • The earlier writ petition (W.P.A. No.12272 of 2026) is allowed to the extent of halting demolition; however, the authorities may still initiate proper eviction proceedings.
  • CAN 1 of 2026 is disposed of; interim orders, if any, are vacated; no costs awarded; certified copies to be supplied upon compliance.

Topics: Demolition Halt, Public Premises Act, Aadhaar Proof of Occupation