LAWS(CAL)-2014-3-135

PANNALAL BOSE Vs. RANAGHAT MUNICIPALITY

Decided On March 20, 2014
Pannalal Bose Appellant
V/S
Ranaghat Municipality Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner inter alia prayed for a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to demolish the unauthorized construction made by the respondent no. 3 on a certain street within the Ranaghat Municipality, to withdraw and cancel the permission granted to respondent no. 3 and for other ancillary reliefs.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner inter alia is that he is the owner of premises no. 70, Pal Chowdhury Street within ward no. 4 of the Ranaghat Municipality. On the left side of the premises exists a plot of land which once belonged to a freedom fighter and was used as a place of worship. The owner of the said plot died in the year 1985 and the petitioner was a distant relation of the said owner. In the year 2003 the respondent no. 3 initiated the construction and erection of a two -storied building on a part of the said plot which was adjoining to the premises of the petitioner. On enquiry it was revealed that one Satya Bala Devi falsely claiming herself to be the niece of the owner mutated her name in the records of the Municipality. Thereafter, the father of the respondent no. 3 on the basis of a fictitious plea of mutual partition caused mutation of his name in respect of a part of the said plot as Raiyati in the records of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act. It was further revealed that the father of the respondent no. 3 had executed a deed of gift and transferred some portion of the land in favour of the respondent no. 3 who had recorded his name in the portion of the said area under Section 50 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act.

(3.) BY an order dated September 28, 2005 the Chairman of the Ranaghat Municipality had directed the respondent no. 3 to demolish the unauthorized construction of two rooms, one stair, one kitchen etc. within seven days from the date of the issue of the notice failing which he was informed that the Municipality would demolish the unauthorized construction and the cost for the same would be realized from the said respondent.