Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Avijit Mallick & Ors vs Raiganj Municipality & Ors on 2 June, 2016
Author: Arijit Banerjee
Bench: Arijit Banerjee
1
02.06.2016
37.
as
W.P.9823 (W) of 2016
Avijit Mallick & Ors.
Versus
Raiganj Municipality & Ors.
Mr. Piush Chaturvedi,
Mr. Bhagbat Chaudhuri.
...for the Petitioner.
Mr. Rezaul Hossain.
...for the Municipality.
The writ petitioners state that after obtaining permission from the
respondent Municipality, they have made construction on the land in question.
They had been summoned by the Municipality in the year 2014 regarding certain alleged deviation from the sanctioned plan and they had answered all queries of the Municipality. Thereafter, there was complete silence on the part of the Municipality.
Suddenly, the petitioners have received a notice dated 2nd May, 2016 for demolition of the entire building in question. The writ petitioners contend that there may be some deviation from the sanctioned plan in the matter of construction of the building but the same is not so major as to call for demolition of the entire building. The Municipality has discretion to regularise the irregularity. In any event, the Municipality is under an obligation to determine the extent of deviation and direct the petitioners to take remedial measure accordingly. Demolition of the entire building is not warranted, is the submission of the petitioners.
2
Learned Counsel for the Municipality submits that the sanction that was granted was for constructing a two storeyed building. However, the petitioners have constructed a three storeyed building, i.e., one entire floor has been constructed illegally and in violation of the sanctioned plan. Hence, the demolition order has been issued.
I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. It appears that at least three representations appearing at pages 46, 47 and 51 of the writ petition have been made by the petitioners to the Municipality in question. The representations have not yet been considered by the Municipality. In my opinion, ends of justice will be served if before taking any drastic measure such as demolition of the building, the Municipality considers the representations of the petitioners in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the Board of Councillors of Raiganj Municipality is directed to consider the representations of the writ petitioners being annexure P-7, P-8 and P-10 to the writ petition and dispose of the same by a reasoned order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioners within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order.
The notice of demolition dated 2nd May, 2016 is quashed and set aside. However, this will not prevent the Municipality from issuing any fresh notice in accordance with law in the event it is found that the writ petitioners have made illegal or unauthorised construction which cannot be regularised under the law.
Since no affidavit-in-opposition has been called for, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed to be not admitted. 3 W.P.9823 (W) of 2016 is accordingly disposed of.
No order as to costs.
(Arijit Banerjee, J.)