S.Chatterji, J. - (1.) The present writ petition has been filed for an appropriate writ commanding the respondents to forbear from dealing with, disposing of and/or using for gains by exhibiting of advertisements in respect of the kiosks being 1000 in number lying installed on the road indicator steel poles on different road sites in the city of Calcutta and belonging to the petitioners and/or forfeiting the same to the prejudice and detriment of the petitioners. It is stated in details that the steel poles being 1000 in number which were erected by the petitioners vested in the Corporation as soon as the same were erected by the kiosks both illuminated and non-illuminated as fitted by the petitioners on the said steel poles remained the properties of the petitioners and the Corporation of Calcutta acquired no right, title and interest and if those were not used the petitioners were entitled to remove the same. According to the petitioners, each of the kiosks valued at Rs. 350/- at the time of erection and by this time this has appreciated in value. It is stated further that though the petitioners went on paying licence fees and advertisement taxes for the said kiosks, the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 removed 240 kiosks in number from different road sites without any notice to the petitioners causing financial loss to the petitioners. The petitioners filed a Title Suit being T.S. No.236 of 1985 in the City Civil Court at Calcutta and there was an interim order for maintenance of status quo. The respondent Nos. 1 to 3 challenged the pecuniary jurisdiction of the City Civil Court to entertain the said Title Suit and the plaint was returned. Being aggrieved the petitioners came to this Court in Revision and ultimately it was found that the revisional application was not maintainable. It is contended that the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 have no right in respect of the kiosks which did not vest in them and to transfer possession of the same to the respondent No.4.
(2.) On the background of these facts, it is argued on behalf of the petitioners that the refusal of the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to deliver the kiosks installed on the road indicator on the steel poles belonging to the petitioners is illegal.
(3.) This Court has considered the matter with all anxieties. The allegations contained in the petition appear to be bona fide. Nothing has been demonstrated before this Court as to how the kiosks supplied by the petitioners could be forfeited. Considering all the aspects of the matter the writ petition is disposed of by directing the petitioners to make a specific representation within a fortnight and the respondent-authorities are directed to consider and dispose of the representation within four weeks from the date of filing of such representation by giving an opportunity of hearing and by passing a speaking and reasoned order. It is made clear that if the respondents have not acquired any right to the property under any provisions of law the petitioners should be sufficiently compensated and/or the kiosks should be returned to them in the manner as prayed for. No order as to costs.;