SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Cal) 287

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Amrita Sinha, J.
Dimple Sarawgi & Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors. – Respondents
WPA 5508 of 2024
Decided On : 19-04-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Srinjoy Das, Adv., Mr. Saroj Banerjee, Adv., Mr. Arbind Singh, Adv., Mr. Jui Jana, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Santanu Kumar Mitra, Sr. Govt. Adv., Mr. Amartya Pal, Adv.

IMPORTANT POINT
The right to enjoy property and carry on trade and business according to an individual’s choice, subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by law.

Headnote:

Construction - Restriction - West Bengal Panchayats Act, 1973 - Section 23, 24 - The court set aside the order of the Zilla Parishad restricting construction beyond B+G+1 storey level, holding that in the absence of a specific notification by the competent authority restricting construction, the Zilla Parishad ought not to have restricted construction at the insistence of the police. The court emphasized the right to enjoy property and carry on trade and business according to an individual’s choice, subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by law.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners sought permission to continue construction of a B+G+4 storied building after the Zilla Parishad restricted construction up to B+G+1 storey level at the insistence of the police, citing security concerns.

Finding of the Court:

The court set aside the order of the Zilla Parishad, allowing the petitioners to continue construction strictly in accordance with the plan sanctioned.

Issues: Whether the Zilla Parishad's restriction on construction beyond B+G+1 storey level was valid and whether the petitioners had the right to continue construction as per the sanctioned plan.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of a specific notification by the competent authority restricting construction, the Zilla Parishad ought not to have restricted construction at the insistence of the police. The court emphasized the right to enjoy property and carry on trade and business according to an individual’s choice, subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by law.

Final Decision: The court set aside the order of the Zilla Parishad, allowing the petitioners to continue construction strictly in accordance with the plan sanctioned.

JUDGMENT :

Amrita Sinha, J.

1. The order dated 16th January, 2024 passed by the Additional Executive Officer, Purulia Zilla Parishad directing the petitioners to restrict construction up to the B+G+1 storey level residential building despite granting permission for construction of B+G+4 storied residential cum commercial building is impugned in the instant writ petition.

2. Learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the construction is being made in accordance with the plan sanctioned. At the time of submitting the plan proposal the respondent authorities did not raise any objection and sanctioned plan for construction of B+G+4 storied building. On the basis of the said sanctioned plan, the plinth and the base level of the construction has been made with the view to construct B+G+4 storied building. Had the respondents not granted sanction for the said construction, then the petitioners would not have been required to construct the base and the plinth in the manner as it has been done. Considerable finance has been invested in preparation of the base and ground level work so that the building could support the load of construction of the B+G+4 storied building.

3. It has been contended that there is no provision in law restricting or refusing permission to make construction after a certain limit and, as such, the petitioners may be permitted to continue with the construction work in accordance with the plan sanctioned.

4. It has been argued that the Zilla Parishad sanctioned the building plan after consideration of all the provision of law and now only at the insistence of the police, the Zilla Parishad restricted construction which is absolutely bad in law and ought to be set aside.

5. The petitioners rely upon the Police Order No. 01 of 2011 issued by the Director General and Inspector General of Police, West Bengal mentioning that the Regional Command Centre and Training Centre of Counter Insurgency Force, West Bengal will be located at Charrah in the district of Purulia after shifting of Battalion headquarters of SAP 11th Battalion and 13th Battalion therefrom to Barjora, Bankura.

6. Reliance has also been placed on the Police Order No. 17 of 2011 issued by the Director General and Inspector General of Police mentioning that there has been massive escalation in violent activities against security forces, government installations and innocent people by Left Wing Extremists. The training in Counter Insurgency shall be conducted at the West Bengal Counter Insurgency Training Centre which is expected to shift to Charrah, Purulia after some time.

7. The Police Order No. 01 of 2012 by the DG and IG, WB has been placed which mentions that the Regional Command Centre and the Training Centre of Counter Insurgency Force, West Bengal will be located at EFR Brigade Campus Salua, district Paschim Medinipur instead of Charrah in the district of Purulia. Police Order No. 01 of 2012 has been passed in cancellation of the Police Order No. 01 of 2011.

8. It has been submitted that as the Training Centre has been moved from the district of Purulia to the district of Paschim Medinipur, as such, the reason for imposing restriction on construction do not hold good at this stage.

9. Prayer has been made by the petitioners to permit them to continue with the work of construction as per the sanctioned building plan and the petitioners undertake before this Court that they would carry on construction strictly on the basis of the plan sanctioned and not in deviation thereof.

10. The learned senior government advocate vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioners.

11. The primary reason for imposing such restriction is the existence of i) many vital offices like:

a) Office of the Superintendent of Police,

b) Office of the Addl. Superintendent of Police,

c) Office of the Dy. Superintendent of Police,

d) RI Office,

e) Reserve Office,

f) Motor transfer office,

g) Motor Transport Garage,

h) Major Office,

i) Home Guard Office,

j) Conference Hal

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top