The Port Blair Municipal Council And ORS v. V.Karunakaran

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** MAT/59/2024 IA No.CAN1/2024, CAN/2/2024 The Port Blair Municipal Council and others Vs.

V. Karunakaran Mr.Shatadru Chakraborty Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi ... for the appellants Ms. Anjili Nag ... for the respondents November 08, 2024 [SR] Item no. 6 1.

By consent of the parties, the appeal and the connected applications are taken up together for hearing. 2.

The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 31st January 2024, passed by a learned Judge of this Court in WPA/67/2024, being a writ petition filed by the respondent herein.

3.

The respondent was apparently running a business from a shop room belonging to the Port Blair Municipal Council, as a tenant.

4.

The shop room was demolished due to its poor condition in the year 2009.

5.

The respondent's case is that at the time of demolition, it was represented to the respondent by the municipal authorities that fresh allotment of shop room will be made to him. That was never done although other similarly circumstanced persons were allotted new shop rooms for the purpose of their business.

6.

With this grievance, the respondent herein approached the learned Single Judge. The learned Judge recorded that the respondent authorities admitted that the submission of the petitioner is correct. On such basis, the learned Judge proceeded to dispose of the writ petition with a direction that the respondents shall allot an alternative shop room to the petitioner as per specification of the shop room demolished, within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of the order.

7.

Being aggrieved, the municipal authorities have come up by way of this appeal.

8.

We have heard learned advocates for the parties. The order impugned appears to have been passed on the basis of concession made by the municipal authorities. Learned advocate for the appellants says that proper materials could not be placed before the learned Judge as there was no occasion to file affidavit. There are materials on record to show that the claim of the writ petitioner cannot be allowed. 9.

Since the order was based on concession of the municipal authorities, we are not inclined to interfere with the order. 10.

This will not prevent the appellant from approaching the learned Single Judge with an appropriate application, if they are so advised.

11.

The appeal and the connected applications are accordingly disposed of.

( Rajasekhar Mantha, J. ) ( Partha Sarathi Sen, J. )