( 1 ) THIS bunch of 21 writ applications is taken up for hearing analogously as they deal with two important questions : whether sub-section (8) of section 400 of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 is ultra vires the Constitution of India and particularly violative of articles 14, 21 and 300a of the Constitution ? And whether section 400 (8) of the Act is violative of sections 29 and 33 of the said Act?

( 2 ) MR. Bankim Dutt, the learned Counsel appearing for some of the petitioners, has advanced strenous arguments to bring home his contention that section 400 (8) of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act is ultra vires of Constitution as well as of certain sections of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. He took the Court through various sections of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 beginning with section 2 (5) which defines "building". The building was defined in section 3 (7) of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1923 and according to the submission of Mr. Dutt the definition of building is substantially the same as in section 5 (6) of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1951. Section 2 (32) of the C. M. C. Act, 1980 defines "a dwelling house" as