The court affirmed the cancellation of the license deed due to the appellant's failure to comply with the stipulated conditions of the agreement.

JUDGMENT

Rai Chattopadhyay, J. - The sole appellant, since deceased, has been substituted by his legal heirs, vide this court's order dated 08.06.2022.

2. The appellant/substituted appellants are aggrieved by the action of the respondent authority in cancelling the allotment of a plot granted in favour of the appellant, since deceased, on December 12, 1996, on the ground of non fulfilment of the stipulated conditions of agreement and challenged the cancellation order in the Court of Ld. Single Judge. However, Ld. Single Bench has not allowed the prayer of the appellant/writ petitioner and dismissed the writ petition, vide judgment and order dated February 10, 2022. The appellants are aggrieved by that order of Ld. Single Bench and have challenged the same in this appeal.

3. The questions that fall for consideration by this appeal court are whether the Ld. Single Judge was justified in coming to the findings in the order impugned; whether or not by the purported action, the respondent authorities have infringed any legal or constitutional right of the appellants which was required to be remedied by an order of the court; whether in the decision making process, Ld. Single Judge has failed to consider infringement if any, as mentioned above and has come to an erroneous conclusion; whether the impugned judgment and order dated February 10, 2022, is liable to be set aside or not.

4. Before discussing the arguments advanced by the respective parties, the factual background of the case may be narrated in a nut shell for better understanding of the perspective thereof, which follows hereunder :

The writ petitioner/appellant, since deceased, was inducted as a licensee for 99 years in respect of Plot No.268 in MIG II category in Block B, at East Kolkata Area Development Project, Phase 1 in Dist:-South 24 Paraganas, measuring about approximately 173 sq. meter. The license commenced with effect from the date of execution of the agreement, i.e, from December 11,1996. The appellant/writ petitioner, since deceased, duly submitted the consideration money as well as the subsequent premium amount including the interest. He was given possession over the land with effect from May 23,1997. The appellant/writ petitioner, since deceased, was unable to raise/complete construction of his residential house on the said land in terms of Clause 2 (III) of the deed dated December 11,1996, within the stipulated period of 5 years. In spite of that he deposited the entire license fee before the authority within the year 2010, which was duly accepted by it.

On February 16, 2018, a show cause notice was issued by the respondent authority to the appellant since deceased, requiring him to show cause as to why the deed of license would not be cancelled on the ground of violation of Clause 2 (III), as mentioned above. In reply, the then writ petitioner (now deceased), prayed for extension of time to raise construction vide his letter dated February 28, 2018. On August 9,2018, the authority again sent a letter to the erstwhile writ petitioner, since deceased, demanding penal charges to the tune of Rs.99,48,452/- for extension of time to complete construction i.e, within December 10,2019. As the writ petitioner exclaimed his inability to pay the penal amount as calculated by the respondent authorities, the deed of license in his favour, granted earlier on December 11, 1996, was cancelled by the authority and the possession of the land was withdrawn, by its Memo No.1029/K.M.D.A/37 dated December 31, 2018, issued by the Secretary, K.M.D.A.

5. Thus being aggrieved by the alleged violation of his legal and rightful claim, the writ petitioner/appellant, since deceased, had filed the writ petition being W.P No.3443 (w) 2019 to challenge the impugned memo of the respondent no.2 dated December 31,2018. After hearing the parties, Ld. Single Bench has delivered its judgment dated February 10,2022, there by rejecting the writ petitioner's prayer.

6. In the impugned judgment Ld. Single