The Kolkata Municipal ... vs Smt. Anuradha Chaudhuri And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 1423 Cal/2

OD-4
                             IA No. GA/1/2021
                                    WITH
                              WPO/186/2020
                                     IN
                             APO No. 38 of 2021

                     IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                         Civil Appellate Jurisdiction


            THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.
                                VS.
                 SMT. ANURADHA CHAUDHURI AND ORS.


BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE

THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SUBHASIS DASGUPTA
Date: November 11, 2021.

                                                                  Appearance:
                                                         Mr. Alok Ghosh, Adv.
                                                      Mr. Gurudas Mitra, Adv.
                                                 Mr. Subhrangsu Panda, Adv.
                                           ...for Kolkata Municipal Corporation

                                            Mr. Rudraman Bhattacharyya,     Adv.
                                                     Ms. Piyali Sengupta,   Adv.
                                                Ms. Amrita Panja Moulick,   Adv.
                                                  Mr. Satyaki Mukherjee,    Adv.


          The Court: This appeal is directed against a judgment and order

dated January 19, 2021, whereby the Learned Single Judge allowed WP No.186

of 2020 by remanding the matter of valuation back to the Hearing Officer.

          It has been strenuously argued on behalf of the appellant

Corporation that there was absolutely no reason for the Learned Judge to

remand the matter. The owner and the occupier of the premises in question

had sufficient opportunity to appear before the Hearing Officer but they chose

not to. Having not availed of the opportunity, they could not approach the Writ

Court with any grievance.
                                             2

           We have carefully considered the order impugned in this appeal. It is

a detailed and well-reasoned order.             The Learned Judge has found after

perusing available records that the owner of the premises in question was, in

fact, denied a fair opportunity of hearing. Primarily on the ground of breach of

principles of natural justice, the matter was remanded back to the Hearing

Officer.

           We had suggested that we shall dispose of the appeal by stipulating a

timeframe within which the fresh hearing would be concluded before the

Hearing Officer.

           Learned Senior Counsel representing the Corporation, on instruction,

is unable to agree to such suggestion. He wants to argue the appeal on points

of law.

           We are, however, not inclined to stay the operation of the order

impugned as, prima facie, we do not find any infirmity in the order.

           We are told that all the papers that were filed before the Learned

Single Judge are before us excepting the affidavit-in-reply filed by the writ

petitioner before the Learned Single Judge. The respondent shall be at liberty

to file such affidavit before this Court.

List the matter under the heading "Application Adjourned" three

weeks hence. It is understood that on the adjourned date the appeal itself will

be heard and disposed of.

(ARIJIT BANERJEE, J. )

(SUBHASIS DASGUPTA, J.)

kc