ACHINTYA GHOSH Vs. STATE OF WEST BEGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Kolkata Municipal Corporation (hereafter the Corporation) sanctioned a building permit in favour of the petitioner for the purpose of raising construction on premises No. 23a/660, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata (hereafter the said premises) vide No. BS- 124 on 28. 10. 1999. The plan was valid till 27. 10. 04. It is the case of the petitioner that on 20. 3. 03 he intended to start construction said premises but was prevented from doing so by the concerned police authorities. Being aggrieved thereby, he had preferred a writ petition before this Hon'ble Court being W. P. 5188 (W) of 2003. On 22. 4. 03, a learned Judge of this Court for reasons recorded in the order granted liberty to the petitioner to carry on construction work at the premises in question strictly in accordance with the sanctioned building plan until further orders. The petitioner was also given liberty to seek assistance from the police for protection of his life and property as well as the safety and security of the labours who would be engaged in construction work. The police authorities were directed to render adequate police assistance, if sought for. However, it was recorded that pendency of the writ petition would not prevent the Corporation from proceeding with the proposal for acquisition of the said premises and/or to take any further step in respect of the construction work thereat in accordance with law.

(2.) IMMEDIATELY after the aforesaid order was passed, the Executive Engineer (Building), Borough No. X of the Corporation vide his letter dated 25. 4. 03 informed the petitioner that the Corporation had already taken steps for acquisition of the said premises for a park and hence it was felt "prudent to withhold the building sanction plan vide No. 124 (B-X)/99-2000 dated 28. 10. 99 for the time being and no construction work will be allowed on the abovenoted premises". According to the petitioner, this letter was served on him on 25. 4. 03 when he had been to the said premises for the purpose of raising construction in terms of the sanctioned building plan. As a consequence, the petitioner could not raise construction. This was followed by a notice under section 4 (1) of the land Acquisition Act, 1894 dated 23. 10. 2003 issued to the petitioner by the 1st land Acquisition Collector, Calcutta pursuant whereto the petitioner filed an objection. However, by letter dated 8. 12. 04 written by the Assistant Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Land and Land Reforms Department, the 1st Land Acquisition Collector, Calcutta was requested to drop the land acquisition proceeding initiated for acquisition of the said premises and an action taken report was directed to be submitted. This was followed up by a letter of the Land Acquisition Collector dated 21. 7. 05 whereby he confirmed to the petitioner's lawyer that no proposal to initiate further land acquisition proceeding for acquiring the said premises had been received by his office.

(3.) THESE facts in the background, the petitioner vide his representations dated 7. 7. 05 and 11. 8. 06 had requested the Mayor of the Corporation to permit him to resume construction excluding the time for which operation of the building plan was withheld by the order dated 25. 4. 03 issued by the Executive engineer and also to revive the building plan by granting extension thereof. No action having been taken by the Corporation, the petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer to direct the Corporation authorities not to give effect to the impugned notice dated 25. 4. 03 issued by the Executive Engineer and also for rescission, cancellation and/or setting aside of the same and to revive the sanctioned building plan dated 28. 10. 99.