High CourtsSingle Bench(2021) 08 CAL CK 0014

Altabur Rahaman Mollah And Anr. vs Mayor In Counsil And Ors.

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 6 August 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Shampa Sarkar, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 379 OF 2019

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

20 paragraphs · 353 words

The petitioner alleges that the order of conversion granted by the Special Officer Building, Kolkata Municipal Corporation dated March 16, 2018, was

passed in violation of the provisions of law.

According to the petitioner, the Kolkata Municipal Corporation did not have any power under the Regulations of 2015 to regularize conversion of

residential spaces to commercial ones.

According to Mr. Sen, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, the Regulation of 2015, did not empower the Kolkata Municipal Corporation to

regularize any conversion of user of flats.

Upon hearing the elaborate submissions, this Court finds that the impugned order has been passed with regard to regularization of 95.13 square metres

of residential area to business area and reduction of the parking spaces from 11 to 10.

Mr. Basu, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 9 to 12 submits that with regard to the allegations of unauthorized user and change of

user of flat No. 1A, the hearing officer is already adjudicating the issue. Thus, according to Mr. Basu, parallel proceedings cannot continue.

Mr. Alok Kumar Ghosh, learned counsel appearing for the Kolkata Municipal Corporation submits that the writ petition is not maintainable in view of

the provision of appeal before the Municipal Building Tribunal under Section 416(6) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act.

Under such circumstances, the Court does not put any impediment on the proceedings already pending in respect of flat No. 1A before the hearing

officer. Such proceeding shall continue and the order shall be passed in accordance with law.

With regard on the impugned order, the Court finds that the matter has to be decided on affidavits. Affidavit in opposition be filed within four weeks

from date. Affidavit in reply, if any, be filed within one week thereafter.

Liberty to mention. The point of maintainability is kept open. The point of maintainability will be decided along with the writ petition itself. In the

affidavit, the Kolkata Municipal Corporation shall also disclose their stand with regard to Flat No. 3A which according to the petitioner, has been

converted for commercial use.

Parties to act on the server copies of this order.