Dismissed¶18

MD Arif v. the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Calcutta HC26 Jun 2025APOT/156/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Refusal of leave to appeal (APOT) from Single Bench order permitting implementation of Town Funding Committee decision under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014; street-vendor vending licence pending over ten years before Vending Committee deemed not germane to writ petition; remedy directed to independent writ petition or application for joinder alleging collusion; Kolkata Municipal Corporation; no costs.

What did the court decide?

The prayer for leave to prefer the appeal is refused; consequently APOT/156/2025 stands dismissed along with the connected applications. ¶18

MD Arif Vs the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

OD-8

¶2

ORDER SHEET

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE

¶4

APOT/156/2025 WITH WPO/69/2025 IA NO:GA/1/2025; GA/2/2025 MD ARIF

¶5

-VS-

¶6

THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS

¶7

BEFORE:

¶8

The Hon’ble JUSTICE RAJASEKHAR MANTHA And The Hon’ble JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR GUPTA Date: June 26, 2025.

¶9

Mr. N. Bhattacharjee, Sr. Adv.; Mr. A. Adak, Adv.; Mr. S. Sarkar, Adv.; Mr. A.G. Sinha, Adv., appear. Mr. A.K. Ghosh, Sr. Adv., Mr. S.K. Debnath, Adv.; Mr. S. Basu, Adv., appear. Mr. A. Mondal, Adv.; Ms. D. Sen(Bose), Adv., appears. Mr. D. Banerjee, Adv.; Mr. R. Jana, Adv., appear.

¶10

The Court: Leave is sought to prefer an appeal against the impugned order dated May 15, 2025, passed by a Single Bench in WPO/60/2025.

¶11

It appears that by the impugned order, the Court has permitted implementation of a decision of the Town Funding Committee dated January 11, 2024, which is a statutory body constituted under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014.

¶12

The proposed appellant contends that the writ petition is a collusive one and that it is an attempt to indirectly deprive the proposed appellants of a vending licence

¶13

¶14

which is pending consideration before the Vending Committee for more than ten years.

¶15

This Court is of the view that the grievances of the proposed appellant may not be the subject matter or an issue germane to the issues in the writ petition pending before the Single Bench in which the impugned order has been passed.

¶16

The grievances of the proposed appellants may be agitated in an independent writ petition.

¶17

In the event, however, the proposed appellant wishes to indicate any collusion or impropriety in the proceedings before the Single Bench, he may apply in accordance with law for being added as a party. Such application by the proposed appellant may be considered in accordance with law by the Single Bench as it deems fit.

¶18

With the aforesaid observations, the prayer for leave to prefer the appeal is refused. Consequently, APOT/156/2025 stands dismissed along with the connected applications.

¶19

There will be no order as to costs.

¶20

(RAJASEKHAR MANTHA, J.)

¶21

(AJAY KUMAR GUPTA, J.)

¶22

MD Arif v. the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Arif v. the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Burdwan Municipality & Ors. Vs Sunanda Chowdhury & Ors.

Csj Enterprise Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Sales Tax Officer Esplanade Charge & Ors.

M/S. Uni-Crystal Technochem Vs the Second Labour Court Wb & Ors.

Abhishek Roy and Ors. Vs Dibaskar Saha and Ors.

M/S Yao Shing Tannery Vs Union of India & Anr.

M/S Yao Shing Tannery Vs Union of India & Ors.