Allowed

Swastik Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Calcutta HC9 Dec 2020WPO/470/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a Writ Petition challenging a demand notice for building permit fees. The Court held the notice became infructuous due to a subsequent fee revision notification and set it aside, permitting the parties to act per the new fees.

What did the court decide?

The impugned demand notice Memo No.IND/WB/FES/2017-18/3579 was set aside. Petitioners withdrawn amount and parties to follow February 2020 notification for fresh demand.

Swastik Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs State… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Calcutta HC (2020)

¶1

ORDER SHEET WPO NO.470 OF 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE

¶2

SWATIK PROJECTS PVT. LTD. & ANR.

¶3

Versus

¶4

STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

¶5

BEFORE:

¶6

The Hon'ble JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA Date : 9^th December, 2020

¶7

Appearance : Mr. Nilay Sengupta, Adv., for the petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, ld. AAG., Mr. Saumitra Mukherjee, Mr. Nilatpal Chatterjee, Advs., for the respondent.

¶9

The Court : The writ petition has been filed, challenging a claim raised against the petitioners by the respondent authorities, as annexed at page 32 of the writ petition. By virtue of the said demand notice (Annexure P3) at page 32 of the writ petition pursuant to a building plan submitted on behalf of the petitioner, a particular amount was asked for grant of permit, along with the approved plan.

¶10

Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that there has been a subsequent revision in the fee structure, vide notification dated February 5, 2020 (No.2694/FES/O/3S-22/2016) published in the Kolkata Gazette Extra-ordinary on February 11, 2020.

¶11

As such, upon hearing both sides, it is evident that the demand notice impugned in the present writ petition automatically becomes academic and infructuous. Thus, any demand now raised for the purpose of issuance of permit along with the approved plan by the respondent authorities shall be subject to the revised notification dated February 5, 2020 (published on February 11, 2020).

¶12

¶13

Accordingly, WPO No.470 of 2018 is allowed, thereby setting aside the impugned demand notice Memo No.IND/WB/FES/2017-18/3579 (Annexure P3) at page 32 of the writ petition.

¶14

It is made clear that the respondent-authorities shall be free to issue a fresh demand notice in terms of the fees as per the February 2020 notification.

¶15

The petitioners shall be at liberty to withdraw the amount deposited, pursuant to the interim order passed in the present writ petition, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties.

¶16

No order as to costs.

¶17

Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.

¶18

(SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, J.)

¶19

S.Das AR[CR]

Swastik Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swastik Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prime Technoplast Private Limited Vs Indian Bank and Ors.

Sumitava Chakraborty Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Dalhousie Jute Company Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Sundarananda Barman and Another Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Kanishk Sinha Vs Union of India and Ors.

M/S. Poddar Business Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors.