Written by Seekriti Saha
What began as a dispute over a disconnected electricity meter later turned into a barbed-wire blockade of the only route home.
The Calcutta High Court has directed the in Paschim Bardhhaman’s Amlajora Gram Panchayat to hear and decide, by two months, a long-sustaining complaint by a local resident, Parimal Maji, who says his neighbors fenced off the only pathway connecting his home to the main road with barbed wire.
On hearing the writ petition filed by Maji, Justice Kausik Chanda disposed of the matter on November 6, 2025, and ordered the panchayat to act on the representation the petitioner had filed nearly a year ago, in January 2025.
How the dispute began
According to the petition, the petitioner purchased land in Plot No. 2086 in Mouza Amlajora in twice, first in 2009, then again in 2012, finally owning 4.66 decimals out of the 7-decimal plot. He built a familial house on the land after he obtained a sanctioned building plan from the Amlajora Gram Panchayat. He had been living there with adequate electricity connections since 2014.
Maji’s electricity supply was disconnected in 2016, and his meter got uninstalled, with no reason given. Repeated appeals were made to the West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (WBSEDCL) which went nowhere, causing Maji to approach the High Court in 2022. During the course Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya directed him to approach the District Magistrate of Paschim Bardhaman.
The District Magistrate in January 2023 directed WBSEDCL to arrange a temporary electricity connection for the petitioner. But the petition alleged that when WBSEDCL officials attempted to restore power, they met with “significant and formidable resistance” from Maji’s neighbours .
The retaliatory fence, petitioner alleges
It is then followed by what forms the core of the current case. Maji alleged that after the failed attempt of restoring his electricity, his neighbours , who are named as private respondents in the case, enclosed the property with a barbed-wire fence “in an act of vengeance.”
The fence runs along the “Al Poth” which is a ridge pathway widely used across the region as an access shared route between plots of land. Maji contended that he holds a lawful easement right to this common pathway, and that his neighbours’ fencing of the pathway amounts to unlawful encroachment and also the violation of his constitutional rights, which includes the right to life and property under Article 21. Maji says the Gram Panchayat took no action to remove the barbed-wire fence.
What the court ordered
While appearing for Maji was advocate Kishore Mukherjee, while the State was represented by advocates Ansar Mondal and Somashree Dey; none of the neighbours named as respondents had appeared before the court of law.
Justice Chanda disposed of the case with a clear direction that the Amlajora Gram Panchayat must take up Maji’s January 2025 representation, give both Maji and the neighbours a hearing, and pass a reasoned order within two months of the order being communicated.
Lawyer alleges pattern of defiance and caste bias
Ahitagni Dey, High Court advocate and lawyer for the petitioner, said: “The Hon’ble High passed an appropriate direction upon the authority but despite his lordship’s direction the respondent authorities continue to violate the Hon’ble Court’s directions. It is a particular case of discrimination faced due to caste but yes, this is not an isolated incident in that area, I have been instructed that there are other encroachments, though not all have come to light.”