Celica Develpers Private Limited v. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation And ORS

N.22Sl WPA 23412 of 2025 151/CL CELICA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED -vsThe Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors.

26.09.2025 SL-13 Ct.19 (S.R.) Mr. Kallol Basu Mr. Sukanta Chakrabarty Mr. Anindya Halder Mr. Ronit Deyashi ... for the petitioners.

Mr. Alok Kumar Ghosh Mr. Gopal Chaudra Das Ms. Ananya Das ... for the KMC.

1. The affidavit of service as filed today on behalf of the writ petitioner is taken on record.

2. After hearing Mr. Basu, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, it reveals that being aggrieved with the order as passed by the competent authority i.e. the respondent no.2 herein under the West Bengal Inland Fisheries Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act of 1984', in short), a copy of which has been annexed at page no.59 of the instant writ petition, the writ petitioner has preferred an appeal before the appellate authority.

3. Drawing attention to page nos.56 and 57 of the instant writ petition, it is submitted by Mr. Basu that it is the grievance of the writ petitioner that despite filing of an appeal under Section 18 of the said Act of 1984, the appellate authority, who is the

respondent no.4 herein, has not fixed any date for hearing of the said appeal including the hearing of the petition whereby and whereunder, the writ petitioner has prayed for interim relief.

4. Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent no.5/authority in his usual fairness submits before this Court that the respondent no.4/authority may be directed to dispose of the appeal as preferred by the writ petitioner within a specified time.

5. On careful consideration of the entire materials as placed before this Court, this Court while disposing the instant writ petition directs the respondent no.4/authority to dispose of the appeal, as preferred by the writ petitioner, positively by the last day of December 2025 without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

6. The said appellate authority i.e. the respondent no.4/authority is further directed to consider the interim relief, as prayed for, by passing a reasoned order positively by the last day of November 2025.

7. The time limits as fixed by this Court are mandatory and peremptory.

8. Liberty is given to the learned advocate-on-record for the writ petitioner to communicate the server copy of this order to the respondent no.4/authority.

9. The respondent no.4/authority is directed to act on

the server copy of this order.

10.

It is further made clear that since affidavits have not been called for, the allegations made in the instant writ petition are deemed to have been denied.

11.

It is further made clear that this Court while disposing the instant writ petition has not gone into the merits of the instant writ petition including the order, which is under challenge before the appellate authority i.e. the respondent no.4 herein.

12.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs. 13.

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all the necessary formalities. (Partha Sarathi Sen, J.)