Disposed

Shiv Prasad Acharya v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC23 Jul 2021WPA/5609/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging inaction by the Khardah Municipality regarding an unauthorized construction complaint. It directed the Administrator to decide the matter by hearing parties and inspecting the site within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to the Administrator of Khardah Municipality to dispose of the petition by hearing parties and inspecting the site within four weeks.

Shiv Prasad Acharya Vs State of West Bengal and… — Municipal and Town Planning | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

23.07.2021 Sl. No.6 srm

¶2

W.P.A. No. 5609 of 2021

¶3

Sri Shiv Prasad Acharya Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶4

Mr. Debasis Kar,

¶5

Mr. Subhajit Chowdhury

¶6

…for the Petitioner.

¶7

Ms. Sipra Mazumdar, Mr. Khairul Alam

¶8

…for the State.

¶9

Mr. Debasish Mallick Chowdhury

¶10

…for the Respondent Nos.5 & 6.

¶11

Affidavit-of-service is taken on record.

¶12

None appears on behalf of the Khardah Municipal despite service.

¶13

This writ petition has been filed challenging inaction on the part of the Chairman, Khardah Municipality in taking steps on the basis of the complaint lodged by the petitioner dated February 12, 2021.

¶14

It is the contention of the petitioner that the respondent Nos.5 and 6 have constructed a G+4 storied building although, the same was not permissible under the law.

¶15

Learned Advocate for the respondent Nos.5 and 6 submits that the officials of Khardah Municipality inspected the premises and directions were issued upon the said respondents to demolish certain portions, which were found to

¶16

¶17

be unauthorised. It is further submitted that those portions have been demolished and the remaining construction is going on in accordance with law.

¶18

These are disputed questions of facts, which cannot be decided at this stage, by this Court. The petitioner has made a representation before the municipality. It is informed that now the municipality is run by the Administrator. The Administrator, Khardah Municipality shall dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated February 12, 2021 in accordance with law upon hearing the petitioner as also the respondent Nos.5 and 6. An inspection of the site shall be made in the presence of the parties. All points are kept open for the competent authority of the municipality to take a decision. The petitioner and the respondent Nos.5 and 6 will be allowed to file documents in support of their claims and make oral submissions. A reasoned decision shall be taken and communicated to all the parties. The competent authority shall act and proceed according to the provisions of the statute.

¶19

The entire exercise should be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order. The parties are directed to act on the basis of the server copy of this order. The petitioner shall annex the copy of the representation dated February 12, 2021 along with the order at the time of communication.

¶20

¶21

This writ petition is, thus, disposed of.

¶22

There will be no order as to costs.

¶23

(Shampa Sarkar, J.)

Shiv Prasad Acharya v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Prasad Acharya 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D and I Taxcon Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Inka Infrastructure LLP and Anr. Vs Panihati Municipality and Ors.

Rathin Kumar Pal and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sanjay Hazra Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Ramesh Sahani and Anr. Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sahadeb Das Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.