ARKASHISH ENTRADE PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri. S. Kataki, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. K. Phukan, learned State counsel appearing on behalf of all the respondents.

(2.) The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondent authorities in issuing a communication dated 13.01.2015 requiring the petitioners to install certain measures in the name of fire fighting in their establishment called City Square commonly known as Big Bazar at Bhangagarh, Guwahati. The direction to stop the functioning of the bakery and restaurant are also the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition.

(3.) The sequence of events leading to the present challenge is almost contemporaneous to another set of action which was impugned by the writ petitioner by filing a separate writ petition and those actions were by the Guwahati Municipal Corporation(GMC). In the earlier writ petition being WP(C)No.952/2015, challenge was against the action of the GMC as indicated above, whereby, the GMC had alleged that there were deviations in the 4 th and 5th floor and the parking space. It was the case of the petitioner that in the appeal preferred by the petitioner, the Appellate Authority (Appeal Committee) came to a finding that the allegations were not based on facts and accordingly allowed the appeal of the petitioner. Thereafter, though a review was filed, the same was rejected as there was no provisions for review in the statute holding the field. Subsequently, a reference was sought to be made by invoking the provisions of Section 438(2) of the Guwahati Municipal Act and at that moment, the petitioner had approached this Court and this Court while entertaining the WP(C)No. 952/2015 has passed an order of stay. The matter was finally heard and this Court vide judgment and order dated 24.04.2019 had held that the reference sought to be instituted was barred by time and in absence any power to condone the delay, there were jurisdictional error and accordingly, the initiation of the reference was interfered with and the findings of Appellate Authority was confirmed. As stated above, another writ petition was filed by the petitioner with the grievance that in spite of the statuary appeal being allowed, the premises in question was sealed by the authorities and this Court in the aforesaid writ petition had passed an order to remove the seal and to make the premises functional. It is at that stage that the present impugned action started by issuance of the impugned order dated 13.01.2015. As indicated above, vide the impugned order dated 13.01.2015 issued by the Deputy Director, Fire and Emergency Services Assam, Terrace water tank of 20,000 liters capacity should be provided; since the present occupancy permission of the building was for Commercial(mercantile) only, no occupancy permission was obtained for the occupancy for mixed occupancy or multiplex; the present firefighting arrangement of the building was not proposed for multiplex or mixed occupancy; the bakery and restaurant should be removed from the premises on the allegation that the same would pose as fire hazards to the premises in question. 3. This Court in the present writ petition had passed an order dated 20.01.2005 staying the operation of the impugned order dated 13.01.2015. It is the case of the petitioners that though the last NOC from the Fire Department was of the year 2014, the subsequent renewal was not done by the respondent authorities on the ground of pendency of the present writ petition.