Disposed

Aftab Alam v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC20 Jul 2021WPA/11199/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court entertained a writ petition alleging unauthorized construction on a bharatia tenancy. It directed the Kolkata Municipal Corporation to investigate the grievances, initiate proceedings under relevant sections of the Municipal Corporation Act, and dispose of the matter within 12 weeks following principles of natural justice.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Kolkata Municipal Corporation to dispose of the proceedings regarding unauthorized construction within 12 weeks, hearing all parties and passing a reasoned order.

Aftab Alam Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Property and Title | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

20.07.2021 Court No. 19 Item no.17 sn

¶2

WPA No. 11199 of 2021

¶3

AFTAB ALAM VS. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

¶4

(via video conference)

¶5

Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee Mr. Tanmoy Kumar Dey ...for the petitioner Mrs. Chama Mookherjee Ms. Paramita Pal ..for the State

¶6

Despite service none appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.7 to 11 as also the Kolkata Municipal Corporation.

¶7

Let the affidavit of service be taken on record.

¶8

Mr. Debjit Mukherjee, learned Advocate, who usually appears on behalf of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, is requested to appear in this matter with his junior Ms. Susmita Chatterjee, learned Advocate. Their appearances may be regularised.

¶9

The petitioner claims to be a bharatia in respect of one room, kitchen along with common bath and privy on the ground floor at premises No.155/H also known as 155/H/18, Keshab Chandra Sen Street, Kolkata – 700 009 at a monthly rental of Rs.150/- according to English calendar month.

¶10

¶11

The allegation of the petitioner is that the respondent Nos.7 to 11 have been continuing unauthorised construction on the premises in question. According to the petitioner, the land in question is a thika land. No permission from the Thika Controller had been obtained.

¶12

This Court is not competent to decide the question of title or the nature of the land in question. However, as there are allegations of unauthorised construction and complaints of such unauthorised construction have been filed before the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, the writ petition is entertained to this limited extent. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation is directed to look into the grievances of the petitioner and dispose of the representation dated June 21, 2021 (at page 20 of the writ petition).

¶13

It is submitted by the Corporation, that in respect of the self-same premises certain complaints have been lodged by other persons claiming to be bharatias and an inspection has been done by the Corporation.

¶14

A stop work notice has been issued and an FIR has been lodged under Section 401A of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act. Proceedings under Section 400 has also been initiated.

¶15

¶16

Under such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction upon the Kolkata Municipal Corporation to dispose of the proceeding initiated in accordance with law and upon observing the principles of natural justice and reach the same to its logical conclusion.

¶17

This Court has not decided the merits of the claim of the petitioner and the entire proceeding shall be decided by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation upon hearing all the parties including the respondent Nos.7 to 11 and a reasoned order should be passed and communicated to all concerned.

¶18

The entire exercise should be completed within a period of 12 weeks from the date of communication of this order.

¶19

This writ petition is thus disposed of.

¶20

There will be however no order as to costs.

¶21

Parties are directed to act on the basis of the

¶22

server copy of this order.

¶23

(Shampa Sarkar, J.)

Aftab Alam v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aftab Alam v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Apu Kumar Das Vs Uco Bank and Anr.

Sanjay Kr. Panja Vs Kabita Purakait

Sukhendu Kr. Ghosal Vs Basanta Kr. Mondal

Dr. Lal Mohammad Khan & Anr. Vs C.B.I.

Pijush Bandopadhyay Vs Chaitali Karmakar

Ashis Dutta & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.