Subhas Chandra Dutta v. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & ORS

Item No. 20 In The High Court At Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side 12.12.2022 Ct-24 WPA 21260 of 2019 Subhas Chandra Dutta v.

The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Mr. Subham Gupta ... for the petitioner.

Mr. Rabindra Narayan Dutta Mr. Hare Krishna Halder ... for the State.

Mr. Tapan Coomar Dey Mr. Debangshu Mondal ... for KMC.

The petitioner complains of illegal and unauthorized construction at 9, Shib Krishna Daw Lane, Kolkata- 700007, Ward No. 25, Borough-VI under the jurisdiction of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation. The petitioner complains that the objection filed against such unauthorized construction is yet to be disposed of.

There is no proof of service of the writ petition upon the private respondents.

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today is taken on record.

Learned advocate representing the Corporation is not ready with instruction in the matter.

In view of the order that I propose to pass, no prejudice shall be caused to the non-appearing

respondents, if the writ petition is disposed of in the following manner.

As it appears that the representation of the petitioner objecting to the illegal and unauthorized construction is pending consideration at the end of the respondent authorities, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the writ petition pending.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of by directing the respondent no. 6 to consider and dispose of the representation made by the petitioner strictly in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all the necessary parties including the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of communication of a copy of this order. The said respondent shall pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to all the necessary parties including the petitioner immediately thereafter. In the event the aforesaid respondent is of the considered opinion that the construction has been made either in violation of the plan sanctioned or devoid the sanction plan, then necessary steps shall be taken to deal with such unauthorized construction, in accordance with law.

The aforesaid respondent shall restrict the consideration of the representation with regard to unauthorized construction only and not enter into or decide any private dispute of the parties regarding right, title and interest in respect of the aforesaid land. It is made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner and all points are left open to be decided by the aforesaid

respondent at the time of consideration of the representation of the petitioner.

The petitioner is directed to forward a copy of the representation dated November 13, 2019 to the aforesaid respondent at the time of communicating the order of the Court.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously on compliance of usual legal formalities.

Sh (Amrita Sinha, J.)