- (1.) THE Court: The petitioners in this AST under art.226 of the Constitution of India dated May 16, 2013 are questioning the steps taken by the authorities of Kolkata Municipal Corporation (in short KMC) for demolition of the building in question in exercise of power conferred on the Mayor -in -Council by sub -s.(8) of s.400 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. Case stated in para.19 of the AST is as follows: - "19. This apart, as your petitioners have subsequently come to learn that the respondent no.1 has neither form any opinion that any building or work is being carried out in contravention of the provisions of the Act or that immediate action is called for in relation to such building or work. Accordingly, the exercise of power under Section 400(8) of the said Act is ultra vires the said provisions."
(2.) CONSIDERING the case stated in para.19, I passed an order yesterday directing Mr. Mukherjee appearing for KMC to produce the records to show that the Mayor -in -Council recorded the requisite opinion under sub -s.(8) of s.400. Mr. Mukherjee has produced the records, which have been made available for inspection by Mr. Banerjee appearing for the petitioners. The records reveal that the Mayor -in -Council took the following resolution: - "Considering the facts and circumstances as stated above in the departmental report and upon due consideration of other relevant issues, it is resolved that since the Person Responsible continued with un -authorized construction as indicated in the precis of the agenda item in spite of departmental action for stoppage of such unauthorized construction and since such unauthorized construction is unsafe and may lead to accident resulting in loss of Human Life and property, appropriate action towards demolition of such unauthorized construction be taken forthwith under section 400(8) of K.M.C. Act 1980 with the help of local administration."
(3.) MR . Banerjee has argued as follows. The document produced describing it as the resolution of the Mayor -in -Council is a doubtful document. There are reasons to say that the document has been prepared for the AST. The agenda item number was over -written. The petitioners purchased a 50 -year old building. No steps were taken for enforcing the s.401 notice. Ingredients of sub -s.(8) of s.400 are totally absent. It was not a case to dispense with the requirement of observance of the principles of natural justice.;