BINOY KUMAR CHAKRABORTY Vs. SABITA DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner complains of violation of an undertaking given to Court as recorded in the Order dated October 14, 2014. The alleged contemnor had suffered an order of demolition passed by the Howrah Municipal Corporation as she was guilty of construction beyond the sanctioned plan. In the writ petition filed by her challenging the order of demolition, she had undertaken not to make any construction at her house till the disposal of her application under Sec. 177 of the Howrah Municipal Corporation. The alleged contemnor has constructed subsequent to such order in breach of her undertaking. The alleged contemnor did not make any application under Sec. 177 of the Howrah Municipal Corporation Act, 1980.

(2.) It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that, the building was incomplete on the date of the order. The fact that the building was incomplete on the date of filing of such writ petition as well as the passing of the Order dated October 14, 2014 has been admitted in the writ petition. The Howrah Municipal Corporation authorities had issued a notice to stop work in the month of May 2014. The stop work notice was not withdrawn by the Municipal authorities. Therefore, there was no possibility of construction subsequent to the month of May 2014. The photographs disclosed in the contempt petition shows construction being done subsequent to the Order dated October 14, 2014. Therefore, the status obtaining on the date of the Order dated October 14, 2014 should be restored.

(3.) On behalf of the alleged contemnor it is submitted that, the status of the building is not clear from the writ petition in which the Order dated October 14, 2014 was passed. The alleged contemnor is not guilty of any violation of the undertaking given to Court. The Howrah Municipal Corporation authorities are yet to decide on the application under Sec. 177 of the Howrah Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. The building remains incomplete and in the status as obtaining on October 14, 2014.