Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
In Re: Jiban Kumar Roy vs The Jalpaiguri on 2 April, 2012
Author: Soumitra Pal
Bench: Soumitra Pal
1
2012
W.P. 2869(W) of 2012
In re: Jiban Kumar Roy ... Petitioner
Vs.
The Jalpaiguri
Municipality & Ors. ... Respondents
Mr. Shamit Sanyal Mr. Anirban Das ... for the petitioner Let affidavits of service filed in Court today be kept on record.
Despite service of notice none appears on behalf of the respondents.
In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the authorities of the Jalpaiguri Municipality to cancel the decision to supply water through pipe which shall be laid on the land occupied by the petitioner, as described in paragraph 5 and to restore the property.
It appears that the petitioner claims to be the owner of the passage through which a pipe is going to be laid for supplying water to the private respondents. Since the petitioner claims to be owner of the said passage through which a pipe is to be laid for supplying water to the private respondents, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the Board of Councillors of the Jalpaiguri Municipality, its Chairman and the Chairman in Council, Water Department of the said Municipality, the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3, to dispose of the matter by passing a reasoned order to be communicated to the parties within eight weeks from the date of presenting a copy of the certified copy of this order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the private respondent nos. 4 and 5 and after verifying the records and after causing an inspection of the site in question upon notice to the parties. At the time of hearing parties are at liberty to furnish documents and deeds in support of their respective contentions and the said respondents in the reasoned order shall deal with the same. Till reasoned order is passed and communicated status quo as regards possession be maintained.
I make it clear that I have not gone into the merits of the matter and all points are left open to be dealt with by the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3.
There will be no order as to costs.
Let urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the petitioner on priority basis.
( Soumitra Pal, J. )