VINOD KUNDALIA Vs. KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard at length both Mr. Ray, learned senior advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate for the Kolkata Municipal Corporation. Mr. Ray on behalf of the petitioners submits that the order passed by this Hon'ble court on 4th September, 2015 giving liberty to the Corporation to proceed against the private respondent, namely the petitioner strictly in accordance with law and the procedure laid down therefor. Mr. Ray further submits that pursuant to the said order no proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner not only that the respondent Kolkata Municipal Corporation was sitting over the order dated 1st September, 2015. All on a sudden only on 9th June, 2016 the Corporation men came to the petitioner's work place at premises no.5, Mullick Street, Kolkata -700 007 at 12 noon onwards. Mr. Ray further submits that without initiating any steps as per law as laid down in the order dated 1st September, 2015 after expiry of nine months the Corporation Authority had started demolition work. Mr. Ray further submits that this demolition work done by the Corporation is bad in law since no notice under Section 401 or 401[A] has, however, been issued to the petitioner.

(2.) Mr. Mukherjee on behalf of the Corporation submits that notice under Section 401 or 401[A] is not at all required because under sub -Section [8] of Section 400 no further notice is at all required to be issued to the person responsible, who is carrying on illegal construction beyond the sanctioned plan. It is also mentioned by Mr. Ray that after 1st September, 2015 no further construction has been raised by the petitioner, which is not disputed by Mr. Mukherjee.

(3.) At this juncture, Mr. Mukherjee prays for some time to produce all relevant records. Such prayer is allowed. Let the matter appear on 14th June, 2015 at 2 p.m. when the Corporation Authorities are directed to produce all the relevant records pertaining to the petitioner's case.