Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 2]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Estate Of Sri Sri Raghunath Jew Thakur & ... vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 6 March, 2008

Author: Jayanta Kumar Biswas

Bench: Jayanta Kumar Biswas

                                         In the High Court at Calcutta
                                        Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
                                                Appellate Side


Present:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas.

                                          W.P. No.3613 (W) of 2008

                               Estate of Sri Sri Raghunath Jew Thakur & Anr.
                                                    v.
                                        The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr Sukumar Bhattacharyya,
Ms Dipanwita Saha Roy,
                                                     advocates for the petitioner.

Mr Sanat Kumar Das,
                                                     advocate for the fourth respondent.

Mr Tapas Ghosh, advocate for the municipality.

Heard on: March 6th, 2008.

Judgment on: March 6th, 2008.

Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J: - The petitioners are questioning the order of the Chairman, Hooghly Chinsurah Municipality dated February 5th, 2008 (at p.52) holding that the constructions in question being unauthorized are liable to be demolished.

Mr Bhattacharyya, counsel for the petitioners, submits that the chairman had no jurisdiction and power to give the decision, only the board of councilors of the municipality was competent to give such a decision as was given by the chairman. Mr Ghosh, counsel for the municipality, finds little to say in justification of the steps taken by the chairman to give the decision. He agrees that under the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 the board of councilors is only competent to give any decision declaring any construction unauthorized. He says that the municipality may be given an opportunity to proceed afresh in the matter.

In view of the above-noted situation, I am of the view that the impugned order should be set aside. I accordingly allow the writ petition and set aside the order of the chairman dated February 5th, 2008. It is made clear that the competent authority of the municipality will be at liberty to proceed with the demolition proceedings in accordance with law. There shall be no order for costs.

Urgent certified xerox copy of this order, if applied for, shall be supplied to the parties within three days from the date of receipt of the file by the section concerned.

(Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.)