S.Chatterji, J. - (1.) By order dated 17.8.1992 this Court disposed of a writ application after considering the submissions made on behalf of the writ petitioner and the Calcutta Municipal Corporation authorities. It appears from the said order that Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharjee, the learned counsel appearing for CMC authorities has brought it to the notice of this Court that the writ petitioner had made a representation for withdrawal of the earlier application. If the said representation is not pressed then the earlier 'Building Plan' cannot be considered. It was fairly submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties that this Court may grant liberty to the petitioner regarding withdrawal of such representation. Recording said submission, this Court granted liberty to the petitioner for not pressing the representation for withdrawal. This Court further made it clear that the pending application for grant of sanction of the Building plan be considered by the respondent Calcutta Municipal Corporation authorities within a period of three months from the date hereof in accordance with the prevailing law.
(2.) An application for recalling and/or reviewing of the order has been made. Mr. Aloke Kumar Ghose and Mr. Satyabrata Majumdar, appearing for the CMC authorities, have argued, inter alia, that there is difficulty in considering the earlier application for sanctioning the plan in accordance with the rules. It is contended that the earlier application since filed by the petitioner was not accepted by the CMC authorities. A fine distinction is sought to be made for difference between filing of the application and accepting the same. It is contended further that "tender" cannot be equayed with the "acceptance".
(3.) Attention of this Court has been drawn to Rule 55 under Schedule XVI of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 that within two months after the receipt of any application made under Rule 47 for permission to execute any work or for any information or document of further information or document required under this Schedule, the Commissioner by a written order either, "(a) grant permission conditionally or unconditionally to execute work, or (b) refuse, on one or more of the grounds mentioned in Rule 52, to grant such permission; (2) When the Commissioner grants permission conditionally under cl. (a) of sub-rule (ii) be made, on regard thereto to impose such condition, consistently within the Act, as he may think fit . . . . .".;