Ajay Kumari v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...
WPA/48/2024 Smt. Ajay Kumari ... Petitioner Vs.
The Andaman & Nicobar Administration and Anr. ... Respondents Mr. K.M.B. Jayapal ...for the Petitioner Mr. V.D. Sivabalan Mr. Arun S. Kumar ...for the Respondent No.1 Mr. Rakesh Kumar ...for the Respondent No.2 February 06, 2024 (M.A.Mobin) Item No.2 The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 9th January, 2024 issued by the Secretary, Port Blair Municipal Council directing the petitioner to remove or dismantle the Single Storied Semi Timber Structure standing on plot being Survey no.58/1/P at Haddo village. It appears from the said notice that it has been alleged that the building in question is rotten and in dilapidated condition and cannot withstand the natural calamities.
Pursuant to an order dated January 18, 2024 the Respondent No.2 has filed an affidavit annexing the copy of the inspection report dated 2nd February, 2024 (wherein the date has been wrongly typed as 2nd January, 2023). Upon going through the said inspection report it appears that the Executive Engineer has opined that a structure is standing
in a haphazard manner resembling a temporary arrangement by using aged and untreated wood. It has been further reported that the side walls exhibit a combination of old tin sheets and weathered wooden panels which has only been painted from the interior. Mr. Jayapal, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner challenges the said inspection report and submits that the building in question has been repaired and at present the same cannot be said to be in a ruinous state or is in a dangerous state.
Since the notice under Section 132 has been issued and inspection pursuant to the order passed by this Court has already been conducted, this Court is of the considered view that the authority should be directed to consider as to whether the petitioner has complied with the requirement of such notice.
The issue as to whether the building is in ruinous or dangerous state requires an adjudication on facts. The petitioner should also be given an opportunity to rely upon materials to controvert the Inspection Report dated 02.02.2024.
In view thereof, this Court directs the Municipal Council to take into consideration the report of the Executive Engineer dated 2nd February, 2024 along with any materials that may be filed by the petitioner contradicting such report and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner pass a reasoned order. The entire
exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible but positively within a period of four weeks in accordance with law. Pending final decision of the Municipal Council, there shall be an order of stay of operation of the notice dated 9th January, 2024.
With the above observations and directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.
Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties, subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)