Md Arif v. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation And ORS

OD-8 ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE APOT/156/2025 WITH WPO/69/2025 IA NO:GA/1/2025; GA/2/2025 MD ARIF -VSTHE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS

BEFORE:

The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAJASEKHAR MANTHA And The Hon'ble JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR GUPTA Date: June 26, 2025.

Mr. N. Bhattacharjee, Sr. Adv.; Mr. A. Adak, Adv.; Mr. S. Sarkar, Adv.; Mr. A.G. Sinha, Adv., appear.

Mr. A.K. Ghosh, Sr. Adv., Mr. S.K. Debnath, Adv.; Mr. S. Basu, Adv., appear. Mr. A. Mondal, Adv.; Ms. D. Sen(Bose), Adv., appears. Mr. D. Banerjee, Adv.; Mr. R. Jana, Adv., appear. 1.

The Court: Leave is sought to prefer an appeal against the impugned order dated May 15, 2025, passed by a Single Bench in WPO/60/2025. 2.

It appears that by the impugned order, the Court has permitted implementation of a decision of the Town Funding Committee dated January 11, 2024, which is a statutory body constituted under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014.

3.

The proposed appellant contends that the writ petition is a collusive one and that it is an attempt to indirectly deprive the proposed appellants of a vending licence

which is pending consideration before the Vending Committee for more than ten years.

4.

This Court is of the view that the grievances of the proposed appellant may not be the subject matter or an issue germane to the issues in the writ petition pending before the Single Bench in which the impugned order has been passed. 5.

The grievances of the proposed appellants may be agitated in an independent writ petition.

6.

In the event, however, the proposed appellant wishes to indicate any collusion or impropriety in the proceedings before the Single Bench, he may apply in accordance with law for being added as a party. Such application by the proposed appellant may be considered in accordance with law by the Single Bench as it deems fit.

7.

With the aforesaid observations, the prayer for leave to prefer the appeal is refused.

Consequently, APOT/156/2025 stands dismissed along with the connected applications.

8.

There will be no order as to costs.

(RAJASEKHAR MANTHA, J.) (AJAY KUMAR GUPTA, J.) tk