BHABENDRA CHOUDHURY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is filed with the prayer as follows:-

(2.) The present writ petition is filed aggrieved by the decision of the Barpeta Road Municipal Board, the Chairman of which is the 6th respondent herein, to construct a bus stand-cum-multistory market complex According to the averments of the petitioner the construction (which is halfway through, as can be seen from the photographs submitted along with the petition) has the effect of completely closing down a particular Road No 10 At paragraph 4 of the petition the petitioner says that more than 50 families inhabit on both sides of the said Road No 10 apart from the existence of some 50 shops It is further stated that the said road, prior to the construction that is under challenge, was a 120 feet road and a part of which was admittedly always used as a bus stand and only the remaining part was being used as a public road The averments in this regard at paragraph 6 of the petition reads as follows:-

(3.) The facts admitted in the writ petition are that the Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta by his proceeding dated 26-9-05 directed that the possession of the property be handed over to the Municipal Board for the construction of the bus stand in question and pursuant to such a direction possession was actually handed over to the Barpeta Road Municipal Board on 28-9-05 admeasuring 2 Bighas, 2 Kathas and 10 Lechas covered by Dag No 693, 763 and 704 These are admitted facts which appear from the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition at paragraphs 12 and 13 It is also an admitted fact that the Barpeta Road Municipality took a decision on 30-8-06 to construct the bus stand The petitioner conveniently did not mention in the writ petition as to the actual commencement of the construction.