G Bhoominathan v. The Lt Governor, Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ORS
23.07.2025 Court No.13 Port Blair Item Nos.1 to 3 AP
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR MAT 34 of 2025 With CAN 1 of 2025 Smt M. Devi Vs.
The Lt. Governor, Andaman and Nicobar Administration and Ors.
With MAT 35 of 2025 With CAN 1 of 2025 Shri G. Bhoominathan Vs.
The Lt. Governor, Andaman and Nicobar Administration and Ors.
With MAT 36 of 2025 With CAN 1 of 2025 Shri R. Mohan Vs.
The Lt. Governor, Andaman and Nicobar Administration and Ors.
Mr. K.M.B. Jayapal ... For the Appellants.
Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty, Senior Advocate Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi Ms. Sonia Das ... For the Respondents.
1.
All three appeals are directed against an order dated 9th July, 2025 passed by a Single Bench of this Court sitting in Circuit Bench at Port Blair. 2.
By the impugned order, the Court recorded that the rolling shutter constructed by the appellants in front of
their shop rooms encroached upon a common passageway. Such passageway is meant for the general public to access all shop rooms in the market including that of the appellants. The writ petition was initially filed challenging an order dated 3rd March, 2025 issued by the Secretary, Sri Vijaya Puram Municipal Council. By the said order, the Municipal Council found that the appellants were obstructing and had encroached upon the common passageway by erecting a rolling shutter. 3.
Learned Single Bench went a step further. It appointed an advocate as a Special Officer to conduct an inspection of the premises. The advocate, Special Officer, has clearly stated that not only have the appellants constructed a rolling shutter obstructing and intruding a common passageway but also have put in tiles flooring in a portion in front of the shop rooms in question and have stocked their perishable goods thereat.
4.
The Single Bench having regard to the findings of the Municipal Council as also that of the Special Officer, found that the order directing removal of the shutter which encroached upon a common passageway in front of the shop rooms of the appellants must be removed and in essence the finding of fact by the Municipal Council, who is a Statutory Authority and a Special Officer appointed by the Court has been upheld.
5.
The question of any further objection by the appellants to the report of the Special Officer or the Municipal Council does not and cannot arise. The Single Bench has, therefore, rightly dismissed the writ petition. 6.
This Court is of the clear view that findings of fact by a Statutory Authority duly supported by Special Officer appointed by Court do not call for any interference. A Writ Court cannot sit in appeal over such findings.
7.
In view of the above, MAT 34 of 2025, MAT 35 of 2025 and MAT 36 of 2025 fail and are hereby dismissed. Consequently, all connected pending applications, if any, are also dismissed.
8.
There shall be no order as to costs.
9.
All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Rajasekhar Mantha, J.) (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)