Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sk. Abdul Rashid & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 17 April, 2023
Author: Amrita Sinha
Bench: Amrita Sinha
02 17.04
Ct No
24
2023 In the High Court At Calcutta
AGM
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
WPA 3681 of 2023
Sk. Abdul Rashid & Ors.
Vs
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Md. Sarwar Jahan
Mr. Maidul Islam Kayal
Mr. Sumit Naskar
... For the petitioners.
Mr. Raghunath Chakraborty
Mr. M. Ahmed
... For the Maheshtala Municipality.
Mr. Moloy Sinha
Mr. Benazir Ahmed
... For the State.
Mr. Sandip Das
Mr. Indu Bhusan Das
... for the respondent no10 to 15.
The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 14 th October, 2022 passed by Maheshtala Municipality directing the private respondents to demolish the unauthorised portion of the subject building within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the order as the same was constructed in deviation of the sanctioned building plan.
The said order was passed allegedly in compliance of the direction passed by the Court on 27 th June 2022 in WPA 10150 of 2020 (Sk. Abdul Rashil & Ors. -Vs.- The State of West Bengal & Ors.).
The specific contention of the petitioners in the earlier writ petition was that the construction was made over a water body.
2The petitioners submit that the impugned order does not specify the extent of the deviation and there is also no mention as to whether the construction was made over a water body or not.
Reliance has been placed on a reply given under the Right to Information Act clearly mentioning that a declaration was filed by the private respondents to submit the conversion certificate within six months from the date of approval of the building sanctioned plan.
The petitioners contend that the sanction was a conditional one subject to submission of the conversion certificate. The certificate not being submitted till date; the sanction is liable to be revoked.
Learned advocate representing the private respondents submits, upon instruction that, the construction was made long back. The learned advocate is however not aware as to whether the conversion certificate was at all issued or not.
It has been submitted that in accordance with the direction passed in the self demolition notice, the private respondents have already demolished the unauthorised portion of the subject building.
Learned advocate representing the Maheshtala Municipality submits, upon instruction that, a plan was sanctioned in favour of the private respondents in July 2014 for construction of two storied building measuring 107.56 Sq. meter in each floor. On inspection it was found that the ground floor was completed but the first floor is not built upon. The mandatory side open spaces have not 3 been properly maintained. The Municipality after hearing both the parties directed the person responsible to demolish the unauthorised portion of the subject building. The same has not been complied till date.
Learned advocate representing the private respondents produces a copy of the communication made by one of the private respondents to the Municipality in November 2022 mentioning that as per the self demolition notice, the unauthorised construction has been demolished.
To ascertain as to whether the private respondents have actually implemented the order of self demolition, the Municipality is directed to conduct a spot inspection upon notice to both the parties and verify whether there is any further unauthorised construction which is required to be demolished.
A report shall be placed by the Municipality on the adjourned date mentioning the extent of unauthorised construction and specifying whether the same has been demolished or not. A specific mention shall be made as to whether any conversion certificate has been obtained by the private respondents.
Let the matter appear in the list on 17 th May, 2023 marked 'For Orders'.
Instruction given by the Municipality be retained with the records.
Affidavit-of-service filed today in Court be retained with the records.
4( Amrita Sinha, J.)