CHAKRAVARTTI,C.J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal from a judgment and order of Bose J., dated 2nd February 1951 by which the learned Judge dismissed an application made by the appellants for certain orders under Section 45, Specific Relief Act and writs of Mandamus against the Commissioner of Police, Calcutta and the Corporation of Calcutta.
(2.) IT has been held in the case of Chairman, Budge Budge Municipality v. Mangru Mia', A. O. O. No. 77 of 1951 which was heard along with this case, that an appeal lies. Of the two respondents in the appeal, the appellants abandoned their case against the Commissioner of Police. Only the case against the Corporation of Calcutta therefore requires to be considered. Briefly stated, the facts are that two plots of land, situated at the junction of Gariahata Road and Ekdalia Road, were purchased in the names of three ladies, Nihar Kumari Debi, Sunayana Debi and Smriti Kana Debi. Who the actual purchasers were, whether the ladies themselves or they and Ganga Gobinda Mukherjee, the husband of Smriti Kana or the joint family, it is not very clear. Be that as it may, after the purchase of the plots, Ganga Gobinda approached the Commissioner of Police for permission or a license to build a cinema house on the site and after a third contiguous plot had been purchased in order to satisfy the requirements of the Traffic Regulations of the Police, the Commissioner informed Ganga Gobinda on 6th February 1945 that there was no objection from the Police point of view to the construction of a cinema house on the proposed site. It appears that the third plot also was purchased in the names of the three ladies. About three weeks before the Commissioner of Police gave his approval, on 14th January 1945, the three ladies, as the recorded owners of the plots, applied to theCorporation of Calcutta for sanction for the construction of a cinema house on the lands and submitted building plans along with their application. Soon, however, some opposition to the project from a certain section of the inhabitants of the locality began to assert itself. The Corporation did not dispose of the application and at one stage had some local enquiries made by some of its Councillors. In the meantime, supporters and opponents of the project appear to have both been active. About three years passed in that way and on 14th August 1948, the Commissioner of Police withdrew the permission given by him on 'the grounds that the area had by then become a residential locality and that someone other than those who were applicants before the Corporation had applied for the permission of the Police. The Corporation has not yet given its sanction.
(3.) THE application out of which the present appeal arises was made on 4th July 1950. The applicants were the three ladies and Ganga Gobinda Mukherjee and they alleged that although the plans submitted by them substantially complied with all building rules and regulations ' and although the construction of a cinema house at the proposed site was recommended by the Councillors who had made a local inspection and although sanction was recommended by the Corporation's own Law Officer, the Corporation was withholding sanction illegally and arbitrarily. It was also alleged that the area concerned was a commercial area and the majority of the local residents were enthusiastic supporters of the project. It is unnecessary to refer to the allegations made against the Commissioner of Police.;