The issuance of a work stop notice must comply with substantive legal reasoning and applicable municipal regulations.

1. Affidavit-of-service filed in court today is taken on record.

2. The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition, being aggrieved by the issuance of work stop notice dated 24.09.2024 issued by the Chairman, Contai Municipality whereby they were restrained from completing the construction of the boundary wall around their property located at Plot No. 655 (Hal), J.L. No. 265, Mouza : Kishorenagar, Ward No. XV. However, in the impugned order, the said property has been erroneously recorded as being situated at Mouza : Jalalkhanbar. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that they are the lawful owners of a parcel of land situated at Mouza : Kishorenagar, Plot No. 655, J.L. No. 265, Ward No. XV. The petitioners contend that, even on an earlier occasion, they had undertaken the construction of the boundary wall and the respondent-Contai Municipality had issued a similar work stop notice dated 07.10.2013. The said action of the respondent-Contai Municipality was challenged by the petitioners by filing a writ petition being W.P. 11787 (W) of 2014, wherein this Court, by an order dated 12.06.2014, restrained the respondent-Contai Municipality from interfering with the petitioners’ construction of the boundary wall upto the permissible ceiling limit as per the West Bengal Municipal (Building) Rules, 2007 , particularly Rule 11(2)(b) of the said Rules. Owing to various practical impediments and circumstances, the petitioners could not complete the construction of the boundary wall at that time. They again resumed construction of the boundary wall in the year 2021-22, the work was again obstructed by the respondent- Municipality as well as local inhabitants. The petitioners consequentially filed WPA 1408 of 2022 seeking police assistance by the respondent-Contai Municipality. This Court, vide order dated 11.03.2022, directed the authorities of the Contai Municipality to extend police protection to the petitioners, to enable them to construct the boundary wall. The petitioners submit that the boundary wall was partially constructed, save and except for the portion which was obstructed due to the placement of the electric transformer within the property. Now that the said electric transformer had been lawfully removed through due process of law, the petitioners sought to complete the remaining construction of the boundary wall. However, they have again been served by the respondent-Contai Municipality with a work stop notice dated 24.09.2024, without any cogent reason or show cause notice.

4. On perusal of the impugned notice dated 24.09.2024, it is evident that the same had been issued without any substantive legal reasoning to justify restraining of the petitioner from constructing the boundary wall. It further appears that the said work stop notice had been mechanically issued without any substantive reason.

5. Learned Advocate for the respondent-Contai Municipality submits that the work stop notice has been issued due to the reason that the petitioners have violated Rule 73 of the West Bengal Municipal (Building) Rules, 2007 , wherein the solid portion of the boundary wall constructed by the petitioners is 2 mtrs. in height, whereas the permissible height under the West Bengal Municipal (Building) Rules, 2007 , is 1.5 mtrs. In view of such deviation from the Building Rules of 2007, the work stop notice was issued to the petitioners.

6. Learned Advocate for the respondent-Contai Municipality seeks and is granted three weeks time to file his report by way of an affidavit after conducting further inspection in the presence of the petitioners or any other stakeholder. Exception to the said report, if any, be