Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Biswanath Agarwal vs The Kolkata Municipal Corporation on 25 November, 2024
Bench: C.T. Ravikumar, Sanjay Karol
1
ITEM NO.33 COURT NO.9 SECTION XVI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 30671/2024
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 19-03-2024
in APO No. 131/2023 passed by the High Court at Calcutta]
BISWANATH AGARWAL & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.178927/2024-CONDONATION OF DELAY
IN FILING and IA No.178930/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
Date : 25-11-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL
For Petitioner(s) Ms. Reena Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Anurag Pandey, AOR
For Respondent(s) Ms. Nandini Sen Mukherjee, AOR
Mr. Sk. Afaz Uddin, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Delay condoned.
The petitioner seeks leave to challenge the judgment and order dated 19.3.2024 passed by the High Court at Calcutta in APO 131 of 2023 whereunder WPO No. 1226/2023 was disposed of.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned counsel for the Respondent no.5, on caveat. In view of the order which we propose to pass, we are of the considered view that notice need not be issued to the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and other Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Dr. Naveen Rawal Date: 2024.11.26 respondents.
13:47:09 IST Reason:
A scanning of the order sought to be impugned would reveal that the Division Bench took note of the fact that the learned 2 Single Judge disposed of the writ petition with such observations and directions disregarding the fact that the adjudication of the question whether the property is a Thika property or not was pending consideration before the Thika Controller. In fact, it is still pending with the Thika Controller. The Division Bench was of the view that the first question to be decided was whether the property concerned was a Thika property or not and that when the said question is pending adjudication before the Thika Controller, KMC ought not to have recorded the property as Thika property. Taking note of all other aspects, the appeal against the said order in the writ petition was disposed of the following lines:
“Accordingly, we direct KMC to correct its records and restore the position that was prevailing prior to recording T628A, Rabindra Sarani as a thika property. Let such exercise be completed within four weeks from date.
We clarify that this will not prevent KMC from taking appropriate steps, in accordance with law, once the Thika Controller passes final order in the proceedings pending before it concerning the property in question.” Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though the Thika Controller was permitted by the Division Bench to proceed with and pass order, such order is yet to be passed. Learned counsel for the caveator would submit that pursuant to the direction issued by the Division Bench of the High Court to the KMC to correct the records and restore the position that was prevailing prior to the recording T 628A Rabindra Sarani by carving out the same from the mother premises, such correction has already been carried out.
Thus, the fact is that pursuant to the disposal of the appeal 3 as per the impugned order on 19.3.2024, the Thika Controller is yet to take a decision as to whether the property concerned is a thika property or not. There cannot be any dispute to the fact that the Thika Controller is having jurisdiction to take a decision as has been directed in respect to the subject property. Hence, we find no reason as to why the direction in that regard could not be complied with. Therefore, in terms of the direction in that regard in the impugned judgment the Thika Controller shall take a decision within three weeks from today. Needless to say that once the decision is taken on that question whether it is a thika property or not, subject to that decision, appropriate follow up action shall be taken by the authorities concerned expeditiously. We also make it clear that the observations made in the judgment of the Single Bench sought to be impugned in WPO No. 1226/2023 as also the fact that the KMC has corrected its records and restored position in terms of the direction under the impugned order, shall not stand in the way of or influence the Thika Controller to take a decision, in accordance with law. In other words, it shall be considered on its own merits. The special leave petition is disposed of as above. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
(DR. NAVEEN RAWAL) (MATHEW ABRAHAM) DY. REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH)