Tapan Kumar Mondal vs State Of West Bengal & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 4765 Cal

   D/L
Item No. 07
04.08.2023
 KOLE

                                FMA 349 of 2023
                                   With
                                 CAN 1 of 2023

                            Tapan Kumar Mondal
                                   -Vs.-
                         State of West Bengal & Ors.


              Mr. Kumaresh Dalal
                                                          ... for the appellant.

              Mr. Rupsha Chakraborty,
                                                              .... For the State.


                      The appellant's writ petition being No. WPA 21748 of

               2022 was dismissed by a learned Single Judge by a

               judgment and order dated February 1, 2023, which is under

               challenge in this appeal at the instance of the writ petitioner.

                      The appellant/writ petitioner says that the private

               respondent has constructed a building at 64/4 Ichapur Road,

Howrah, without obtaining any sanctioned plan from

Howrah Municipal Corporation.

Before the learned Single Judge, it appears that copy

of a sanctioned plan was produced by the private

respondent. Initially, the reverse of the plan was not

disclosed. The writ petitioner disclosed the reverse of the

plan and indicated that there is an endorsement to the effect

"sanction refused". The writ petitioner further contended

that the sanction of building plan was in respect of premises

no. 64(P), Ichapur Road and not 64/4, Ichapur Road.

Howrah Municipal Corporation filed a report before

the learned Single Judge to the effect that there was a

sanctioned plan but the private respondent has constructed

mezzanine floor having an area of approximately 70 sq. ft.

which is beyond the sanctioned plan. Demolition proceeding

has been initiated in respect of such unauthorized portion of

the building.

Noting the aforesaid, the learned Judge concluded

that the allegation of the writ petitioner that there was no

sanctioned plan at all, was not substantiated. Further, to the

extent the private respondent has made unauthorized

construction, the Corporation has already taken steps to deal

with the same. Accordingly, the learned Judge dismissed

the writ petition. Hence this appeal.

From the affidavit of service filed in court today, we

find that learned Advocates for Howrah Municipal

Corporation and the private respondent have been served.

However, neither of them is represented today. The

presence of the Corporation, in particular, is necessary for

meaningful hearing of this matter.

In the impugned order, the statement of the private

respondent to the effect that he has filed a suit before the

learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2nd Court at Howrah

being TS No. 1174 of 2022 arraying the Howrah Municipal

Corporation and the appellant herein as defendants has been

recorded by the learned Single Judge. The private

respondent is directed to produce copies of the records of

that suit before us on the adjourned date.

List the matter once again on 09.08.2023.

In the meantime, notice be served on the Corporation,

the private respondent and/or their learned Advocates

intimating that this matter will be again listed on

09.08.2023.

(Arijit Banerjee, J.)

(Apurba Sinha Ray, J.)