SUSMITA BASU Vs. KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directed against the illegal blocking of the access to the business place of petitioners being premises No. 136, Hazra Road, Kolkata 700026 by the Kolkata Municipal corporation and thereby preventing the petitioners from carrying on its business therein.

(2.) The petitioners have also challenged the legality and propriety of the purported order dated September 29th, 2003 passed by the Deputy Municipal Commissioner (Licence) of Kolkata Municipal Corporation.

(3.) The case of the petitioners is that Sree Prasanna Basu, since deceased, husband of petitioner No. 1 entered in a dealership agreement with Caltex (India) Limited on October 1st, 1975. The undertaking of Caltex (India) Limited stood transferred and vested in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited. That Kolkata Municipal Corporation issued trade licence till 1977. On March 29th, 1979 the Deputy Licence Officer refused to issue trade licence in favour of Sree prasanna Basu for the year 1978 1979. Sree Basu against the said order of refusal moved before the Hon'ble Court and obtain rule in his favour. Sree Basu again moved before Hon'ble Court for issuing the rule against the refusal of the concerned authority to issue licence for the year 1979 1980. The High Court directed to maintain status-quo. On June 1st, 1993 Sree Basu died. After the death of Sree Basu petitioner No. 1 being the wife and petitioner No. 2 being the daughter of Sree Basu came into the picture and they were carrying on the dealership business. The petitioners thereafter applied for renewal of trade licence for the year 1994 1995, 1995 1996 and also applied for renewal of certificate of enlistment for 1996 1997. The petitioners moved before the Hon'ble Court challenging the refusal on the part of the respondents for renewal of certificate of establishment for the years aforesaid. Hon'ble court passed an order of status-quo. The authority concerned thereafter issued licence for the years 1996 1997, 1997 1998 and 1998 1999. The petitioners applied for renewal of certificate of enlistment for the year 1999 2000 which was also refused by the authority concerned. Petitioner moved again before the Hon'ble Court. Hon'ble Court was pleased to direct the respondents to consider the representation of petitioners and pass order and also directed to maintain status-quo till the decision of concerned authority.