Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
In Re: Dr. Binoy Ranjan Roy vs The Kolkata Municipal on 5 August, 2010
Author: Soumitra Pal
Bench: Soumitra Pal
2010
W.P. 13576 (W) of 2010
In re: Dr. Binoy Ranjan Roy ... Petitioner
Vs.
The Kolkata Municipal
Corporation & Ors. ... Respondents
Mr. Kishore Dutta Mr. Sayantan Basu Mr. Supratik Syamal Mr. Asish Chowdhury ... for the petitioner Mr. Pranab Kr. Dutta Mr. Achintya Banerjee ... for K.M.C. Mr. Kallol Bose Mr. T.M. Siddique ...for respondent no.4 Mr. Pratik Dhar Ms. Jayeeta Chakraborti Mr. Surya Sarathi Basu ... for respondent Nos. 6 and 7 Mr. Ashok Kr. Roy ... for respondent no.8 In the writ petition, the petitioner, stated to be the owner of the premises pursuant to an auction sale conducted by the United Bank of India, Kolkata (North Region), has prayed for a direction upon the authorities of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation to take steps against the respondent no.8 for keeping livestock and running a slaughter house allegedly maintained illegally at the said premises. It has been alleged that the respondent no.8 is carrying on trade without having appropriate licence under the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 and is slaughtering the animals without having them slaughtered at the approved slaughter house.
The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent no.8 submits that the allegation of slaughtering animals illegally is not correct and the business is carried on by his client is in accordance with law. Further, he is not using the premises as a slaughter house.
2Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation submits on instruction that pursuant to the complaint an inspection was made and it was found that the premises in question is not used as a slaughter house though during the inspection it was found that live animals are kept.
Having heard the learned advocates for the parties, since it is submitted by the learned advocate for the Kolkata Municipal Corporation that on inspection it has been fund that animals are not slaughtered in the premises in question, no order is passed on the writ petition save and except that the respondent no.8 would be entitled to keep live animals after having a valid licence under section 519 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. In the event if it is found that the petitioner is not having the licence, the authorities of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, the West Bengal Pollution Control Board and the Officer- in-Charge, Tala Police Station shall take appropriate action in accordance with law. The writ petition is, thus, disposed of.
Since the writ petition is disposed of without calling upon the respondents including the private respondent no.8 to file affidavits controverting the allegations, the allegations made therein are deemed not to have been admitted by them.
There will be no order as to costs.
Let urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the appearing parties on priority basis.
( Soumitra Pal, J.)