Bijoy Krishna Dam Vs the Sribhumi Municipal Board (Erstwhile Karimganj Municipal Board) and 3 Ors.

Heard Mr. S. Banik, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Dhar, learned Standing Counsel for the Sribhumi Municipal Board for the respondents Nos. 1 and 2.

¶21

In view of the nature of order proposed to be passed, the issuance of notice to the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 is dispensed with.

¶22

By order dated 28.11.2024, passed in WP(C) No. 7620/2023, this Court has directed the Karimganj Municipal Board to address the grievance raised by Bijoy Krishna Dam (petitioner in this case) by further directing that the Municipal Board shall hear all affected parties, examine all the relevant documents and if necessary, call for a report and thereafter pass appropriate orders on the representatives. The said representation is dated on 04.10.2023.

¶23

By order dated 16.12.2024, passed in WP(C) No. 5560/2023, the Karimganj Municipal Board (now Sribhumi Municipal Board) was directed to hear the complaint petition dated 12.06.2023, filed by Naba Kishor Deb (respondent No.4) within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of order dated 16.12.2024 passed in WP(C) No. 5560/2023. However in WP(C) 5560/2023, the parties were directed to

¶24

Page No.# 3/4

¶25

appear before Karimganj Municipal Board on 16.12.2024.

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter was to be decided by the Chairman, Sribhumi Municipal Board, which was a dispute between the 2 (two) parties i.e. the petitioner and the respondent No.4 herein. However, the said authority has issued a copy of the notice to the respondent No.3, who is the District President of a Political party to attend the discussion on 10.01.2025.

¶27

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that presence of any person with a political background is not warranted for settlement of dispute of such nature. Accordingly, the present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as the petitioner is aggrieved by the invitation given to a person from a political party to attend the discussion.

¶28

Learned Standing Counsel for the Sribhumi Municipal Board submits that the presence of the other parties mentioned in the notices are required to settle the dispute between the parties.

¶29

Having noted that in the orders passed by this Court in WP(C)No.7620/2023, WP(C)No.5560/2023, and Rev.Pet No.99/2023, there is no direction for the presence of any other person or a person with a political background. Therefore, in the decision making process by the Karimganj Municipal Board now Sribhumi Municipal Board, the Chairman, Sribhumi Municipal Board is directed to exclude the presence of any third party including any person with a political background when the matter between the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 is being decided.

¶30

However, it would be permissible for the said authority to have the

¶31

Page No.# 4/4

¶32

presence of the Ward Member and another officials to whom notice have been issued on 31.12.2024 and 03.01.2025, by the Chairman, Sribhumi Municipal Board.

¶33

As the respondent No. 3 is not a party to the said two writ petitions, the Court has not found any necessity of hearing the respondent No. 3.

¶34

It is also provided that in the event, the respondent No. 4 is aggrieved by the order, liberty is granted to seek modification of the order, if so advised.

¶35

Petitioners shall produce a certified copy of this order before the Sribhumi Municipal Board within 10 (ten) working days from today. Thereupon, the authority of the Sribhumi Municipal Board shall issue 7 (seven) days notice to the parties and hear the matter in accordance with law.

¶36

13. With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition stands disposed of at the motion stage without issuance of notice upon the respondents.

¶37

Judge

¶38

Comparing Assistant

Bijoy Krishna Dam v. the Sribhumi Municipal Board (Erstwhile Karimganj Municipal Board) and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bijoy Krishna Dam v. the Sribhumi Municipal Board (Erstwhile Karimganj Municipal Board) and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Assam Public Service Commission and Anr. Vs Kanchan Hazarika and 7 Ors.

The School Management Committee Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

M/s Kooje Janggo Enterprises and Anr. Vs The State of Ap and 6 Ors.

Nokren Jamikham Vs The State of Ap and 4 Ors.

Smti Niva Mili Pegu and 2 Ors. Vs National Insurance Company Ltd. and 2 Ors.

M/s K T Enterprises Vs The State of Ap and 7 Ors.