##PAGE1##

OD-11

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Special Jurisdiction (Contempt)

ORIGINAL SIDE

WPO/723/2025

SACHINDRA NATH KARMAKAR

VS

THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS

BEFORE:

The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY

Date : 23rd December, 2025.

Appearance:

Mr. Raghunath Chakraborty, Adv.

Mrs. Amrita De, Adv.

Mr. Mohana Das, Adv.

..for the petitioner.

Ms. Tapati Samanta, Adv.

..for the state.

1. This present writ petition has been filed complaining illegal

construction at premises no. 14C, Bechu Chatterjee Street, Kolkata -700009.

According to the petitioner, the private respondents had previously commenced

a construction at the said premises. However, it is with the intervention of the

Hon’ble Court vide order dated 20th June, 2017, such illegal construction was

demolished.

2. Subsequently, however, the private respondents have taken a

sanctioned building plan and in the guise of constructing in accordance with

the sanctioned building plan, have covered up the mandatory open place which

is adjacent to the petitioner’s premises.

3. The private respondents are represented and would submit that

the construction that is going on is in accordance with the sanctioned building

plan, though an additional 30-40 square feet has been constructed beyond the

2

sanctioned building plan for which an appropriate application for

regularization has also been filed.

4. Copy of the sanctioned building plan under Rules 3(2) and 141 of

the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Building Rules, 2009 is taken on record.

5. The representation made by the respondent for regularization of

the additional constructed area made vide undated representation received by

the Municipality on 21st August, 2025 is also taken on record.

6. Municipal authorities have, however, carried out an inspection and

have been able to identify that the person responsible has covered the

mandatory open place and accordingly the municipal authorities had issued a

stop work notice under section 401 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation,

1980, on the respondents on 15th September, 2025, and the factum of issuance

of such notice was also communicated to the police authorities. Let the report

filed in Court today be taken on record.

7. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the learned

advocate representing the respondents and upon perusal of the report of the

Municipality and the records, it would prima facie appear that the private

respondents are in the habit of carrying out illegal construction. Previously,

illegal construction had also been undertaken by the private respondents. The

same was demolished at the instance of the petitioner, through the intervention

of this Court. Again in the guise of carrying out the repair works, the private

respondents have violated the building rules and have encroached upon the

mandatory open space.

3

8. Though an application for regularization has been filed with the

municipal authorities, I am of the view that there is no scope for regularization

to be issued in favour of a habitual offender.

9. Having regard thereto, I direct the municipal authorities to

forthwith take steps in accordance with law to ensure that the municipal rules

are complied with, and initiate the appropriate steps for removal of the

unauthorized construction within twelve weeks from the date of

communication of this order.

10. The writ petitioner is accordingly disposed of.

(RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY, J.)

Arsad