Smt. Sadhana Mukherjee & Anr vs The Kolkata Municipal ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5255 Cal

   D/L
Item No. 7
10.08.2022
 KOLE
                               MAT 1120 of 2022
                                    With
                             IA No. CAN 1 of 2022

                   Smt. Sadhana Mukherjee & Anr.
                               -Vs.-
               The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors.


             Mr. Sabir Ahmed,
             Mr. S. Mukherjee,
             Mr. I Chatterjee,
             Mr. A. Rakib,
                                                       ... for the appellants.

             Mr. Gurudas Mitra,
             Mr. S. De,
                                                               ... for the KMC.



                     By consent of the parties the appeal and the

              application are taken up for hearing together.

                     A judgment and order dated July 8, 2022, whereby

              WPA 14654 of 2022 was dismissed by the Learned Single

              Judge, is under appeal.

                     It appears that four persons approached the learned

              Single Judge by filing the present writ petition challenging

              an order of demolition dated March 2, 2022 passed by the

              Special Officer Building, Kolkata Municipal Corporation (in

              short 'KMC'), in respect of premises no. 23, Jadavgarh

              Colony, Ward No. 105, Borough-XII. The writ petitioners

              submitted before the learned Judge that the demolition

              order was passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to

              all of them.

                     It transpired that the petitioner nos. 3 and 4 had been

              notified by the Special Officer Building and they had full
                                 2




knowledge of the hearing that the Special Officer Building

offered. Whether or not they chose to attend such hearing is

irrelevant. If they did not, it was at their own peril. The fact

remains that they suppressed the aforesaid factum of having

received notice from the Special Officer Building and did not

mention such fact in the writ petition.

       Upon learned Advocate for KMC bringing the facts

before the learned Single Judge, the writ petitioner nos. 3

and 4 were transposed as respondent nos. 10 and 11.

However, learned Judge dismissed the writ petition on the

ground of suppression of material facts. The other two writ

petitioners have come up in appeal before us.

Firstly, we find no infirmity in the order of the learned

Single Judge. Litigants approaching a court of equity with

unclean hands are not entitled to any relief. There was clear

suppression of material facts before the learned Single Judge

and the learned Judge was absolutely right in rejecting the

writ petition on that ground.

Secondly, an order of demolition passed by the

Special Officer Building is appellable under the KMC Act,

1980. In view of such alternative efficacious remedy being

available to the appellants, there is no reason why the writ

court should interfere. The order under appeal does not

warrant interference.

The appeal and the connected application are

accordingly dismissed. This will, however, not prevent the

appellants from taking recourse to any other remedy they

may have in accordance with law before the appropriate

forum.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be

supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.

(Rai Chattopadhyay, J.) (Arijit Banerjee, J.)