Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J. - (1.) THE petitioners in this WP under art. 226 of the Constitution of India dated August 16, 2012 are alleging inaction on the part of the Chairman of the Bhatpara Municipality in that the Chairman has not considered the question of exercising power under art. 220 of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 on the basis of their complaint dated July 13, 2012 (WP p.16). Advocate for the Municipality submits that for pendency of a litigation before the Civil Court the Chairman did not take any action in the matter, and that the petitioners will be informed immediately about the opinion of the Chairman. Advocate for the private respondents submits that the allegations made in the complaint are not acceptable, because the Civil Court has passed appropriate order.
(2.) THE only allegation in this WP is that the Chairman did not take action on the basis of the complaint. The admitted position is that the Chairman did not respond to the complaint received by him as back as July 13, 2012. He was under a statutory obligation to examine the question of steps under s. 220. If he was of the opinion that the allegations were not sufficient to take any step, then he ought to have informed the petitioners accordingly. By remaining silent and indifferent he generated this unnecessary litigation. This Court is unable to appreciate this tendency to remain indifferent and inactive.
(3.) ADVOCATE for the Municipality has been given an opportunity of considering whether the Chairman will file any opposition explaining why costs should not be imposed. Advocate has said that in his opinion it is not necessary to file any opposition. He has said that the Chairman will take necessary steps in the matter immediately.;