ARIJIT BANERJEE, APURBA SINHA RAY
Nirmal Kumar Das also known as Nirmal Das – Appellant
Versus
Kolkata Municipal Corporation – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Apurba Sinha Ray, J.) :
1. The appellant, a self-proclaimed law abiding citizen, raised a construction on a thika property without sanctioned plan from the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (‘KMC’ in short hereinafter) and consequently a stop work notice under Section 401 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 (in short the Act, 1980) dated 18.10.2022 was served upon the appellant but as he continued with the construction work defying the said stop work notice, an FIR was lodged against him under Section 401A of the Act, 1980. As the appellant did not stop his construction even thereafter, steps were taken by the Authorities under Section 400(8) of the Act, 1980.
2. The main grievance of the appellant/writ petitioner is that though notice under Section 401 of the Act, 1980 was served upon him no step was taken from the side of the KMC under Section 400(1) of the Act, thereby depriving the appellant of an opportunity of being heard before the concerned Special Officer (Building) of the KMC.
3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, Mr. Aniruddha Chatterjee, has submitted that by virtue of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 2014 the Kolka
Smt. Icchu Devi Choraria Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported at (1980) 4 SCC 531
State of UP Vs. Harendra Arora & Anr.
Oriental Bank of Commerce Vs. Sunder Lal Jain & Anr.
Mani Subrat Jain Vs. State of Haryana & Ors.
State of Orissa Vs. Ram Chandra Dev & Ors.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.