Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
In Re: Chang Al Chen & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 27 February, 2019
1
27.02.19
Item No.03
Court No.15
Krishnendu
W.P. No. 3296 (W) of 2019
In re: An application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed on
08.02.2019;
And
In re: Chang Al Chen & Ors.
- Versus -
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Sudip Deb
Mr. Sunil Kumar Chakraborty
For the Petitioners
Mr. Partha Protim Roy
Mr. Ram Chandra Guchhait
For the State
Mr. Ranajit Chatterjee
Mr. Subhrangsu Panda
For the K.M.C.
The present writ petition has been preferred challenging inter alia the deletion
of the name of the husband of the petitioner no. 1 from the mutation records of the
Kolkata Municipal Corporation (in short, K.M.C.) pertaining to premises no.104,
Maheswartala Road, Kolkata-700046.
Mr. Deb, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner no.1 is the widow and the petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are the sons of late Chu
Miao Hua, who expired on 6th January, 2018. The death of Chu Miao Hua was duly
reported to the K.M.C. authorities. The petitioners are presently running a restaurant
at the concerned premises and have been regularly paying taxes, as would be explicit
from the document annexed at page 51 of the writ petition. The last payment was
made on 18th May, 2017.Surprisingly, from the website of K.M.C., the petitioners
came to learn that the name of Chu Miao Hua has been deleted and in his place and
stead, the name of Ganapati Enterprises & Ors. had been inserted.
2
He contends that such deletion of the name of the husband of the petitioner
no.1 from the mutation records has been effected without even granting an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. An objection lodged to that effect on 11th
January, 2019 has also not been considered. The current mutation status of the
concerned premises has been brought on record by a supplementary affidavit. Let
the same be kept on record.
Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate appearing for K.M.C. submits that the
death of Chu Miao Hua was not duly intimated to the K.M.C. authorities and proper
application has not been submitted for incorporation of the names of the petitioners
herein.
The assessee number, which was allotted to the husband of the petitioner no.
1, stands reflected in the document at page 7 of the supplementary affidavit but
against the said assessee number, the name of Ganapati Enterprises & Ors. had been
inserted.
The name of the husband of the petitioner no.1 has been deleted without even
granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and such action is violative of
the principles of natural justice and on the said limited ground, the insertion of the
name of Ganapati Enterprises & Ors. in the mutation records of the concerned
premises is set aside.
The respondent no. 5 is directed to consider the petitioners' representation,
submitted through their learned advocate, on 11th January, 2019 and to take a decision, in accordance with law, upon granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner no. 2 and other interested parties, if any, and to communicate the decision to the petitioners.
3
The above exercise shall be completed by the respondent No. 5 within a period of two weeks from the date of communication of this order. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties upon compliance of all necessary formalities.
(Tapabrata Chakraborty