( 1 ) IN this writ petition the writ petitioners have challenged the Memo No. C6020 / Con dated 14-10-93 issued by the District Magistrate, North 24-Parganas in purported exercise of powers conferred upon him u / S. 548 (2) of the Bengal and Municipal Act, 1932 and the consequential Order dated 21-10-93 issued by the Chairman, Barranagar Municipality suspending construction of Building at premises 59, Kalicharan Ghosh Road, according to the building plan sanctioned by the Baranagar Municipality on 5-6-l993.

( 2 ) THE facts, inter alia, leading to this writ petition are that the petitioners are the owners of diverse portions of premises No. 59 Kalicharan Ghosh Road, Calcutta-700 050.

( 3 ) ORIGINALLY the said premises belonged to Sri Ajoy Kumar Das and 21 others. Total area of land comprised in the said premises is 36988. 36 sq. mtrs. Out of the said 36988. 36 sq. mtrs. the petitiooners have purchased 24090 sq. mtrs.

( 4 ) THE erstwhile owners of the said premises filed returns under Section 6 (1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act in respect of lands belonging to them lying and situate at Calcutta Barrackpore and Howrah Sub-division.

( 5 ) ON or about 14/05/1993 the erst- while owners through their constituted attorney the petitioner No. 1 in the instant petition submitted an application to the competent authority praying inter alia for permission to proceed with the construction work at premises No. 59, Kalicharan Ghosh Road, Calcutta-700 050 upon a clear undertaking to the following effect: -"we undertake, declare and indemnify the authorities concerned to the extent that if the permission / grant as prayed for is conceded now and later if the authorities concerned find that such development / construction of structures and / or buildings is being done on the vacant land beyond the ceiling limit, we would do the needful in accordance with law. "

( 6 ) COMING to learn that in such cases certain formalities are required to be complied with under the guidelines of the Central Government the erstwhile owners through their said Constituted Attorney the petitioner no. 1 failed an affidavit affirmed on 5/06/1991 and also an Indemnity Bond dated 5/06/1991 before the competent authority under the UL (C and R) Act.

( 7 ) ON 6/06/1991, the sub-divisional officer and the competent authority under the Land Ceiling Act heard the application dated 14/05/1991 filed by the erstwhile owners and passed the following order : subject to the final disposal of the returns under Section 6 (1) of the UL (C and R) Act 76 returnees will not act in any way which will be detrimental to the interest of the State Government. On receiving verification report u / S. 7 (i) of the UL (C and R) Act 76 the excess land as may be determined to be vested from this suit property or from the property of Calcutta and Howrah as per option of the returnees. Urban Land ceiling authority is empowered to specify the areas which is to be retained by the returnees. Returnees or their representative may apply to the appropriate authorities concerned for use of the land at the suit property as per provisions and regulations as provided in law.

( 8 ) ON 26/06/1991 Draft statement under Section 8 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act was issued vide Memo No. 781 wherein the returnable land area was shown to be 30842. 96 sq. mtrs. and excess vacant land was earmarked as 6145. 40 sq. mtrs. Draft statement related only to the premises No. 59, Kalicharan Ghosh Road, Calcutta-50 as the survey report in respect of Howrah property and Calcutta property had not yet reached the competent authority. The said draft statement was issued on the clear undertaking given by the said applicants by filing an affidavit and also an indemnity bond as required by the authority. After taking into consideration the said undertaking and the indemnity bond furnished by the erstwhile owners to the effect that they did not hold any other vacant land in any of the u