ARATI PAL Vs. NIRMAL KUMAR TEKRIWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two matters are taken up for disposal together as they involve common questions of law and fact which are. more or less similar.

(2.) In both these two matters, notices issued by the Howrah Municipal Corporation under section 177 (1) of the Howrah Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, have been challenged as being ultra vires, on the ground that it vests certain powers in the Commissioner without laying down any guidelines for exercise of such powers, giving scope for arbitrary exercise of such powers in identical cases.

(3.) Appearing in support of the writ application filed by Smt. Atari Pal, Mr. Mukul Prokesh Banerjee, learned advocate, firstly submitted that is the absence of any guidelines, the powers vested in the Commissioner under subsection (1) of section 177 of the aforesaid Act gave him the absolute and unfettered discretion to take recourse to any of the measures provided for therein. Mr. Banerjee pointed out that under the aforesaid provisions, the Commissioner could is identical circumstances either make an order directing that a construction be stopped or demolished or such addition or alteration therein be made as considered necessary. Mr. Banerjee submitted that in the absence of any guideline, the Commissioner was free to choose any of the three measures, entirely according to his whims and fancy, which could lead to arbitrary and discriminatory exercise of power.