- (1.) The petitioners filed the present writ petition for revaluing the order dated 16th September, 2011 passed by the Hearing Officer I of 2,69,500/- with effect from 4/of 2006-07 in respect of premises No. 127C, Raja S.C. Mullick Road, Kolkata-700 047. The petitioners' case in brief is that the premises No. 127C Raja Subodh Chandra Mullick Road, Kolkata, Kolkata-47 (hereinafter referred to as the said premises) originally belonged to Late Amulya Chandra Sadhukhan and after his demise on 2nd March 2009, the petitioner No. 1 his widow and petitioner No. 2 his only son became the owner of the said premises upon natural inheritance. 1(a) Thereafter Late Amulya Chandra Sadhukhan during his lifetime obtained sanctioned building plan from Kolkata Municipal Corporation for construction of ground + three storied building B.S. No. 183 dated 30.08.2003. Thereafter Late Amulya Chandra Sadhukhan entered into a development agreement dated 15.12.2004 with the developer for constructing the said ground+3 storied building as per the sanctioned plan and subsequently the said development agreement was amended on 7.2.2007 upon setting certain terms and conditions therein. 1(b) On 7th February, 2005 Amulya Chandra Sadhukhan informed the Executive Engineer (Building) of KMC under Rule 21 of the said KMC Act, 1980. On 5th March, 2008 letter of possession was given by the developer to the said Amulya Chandra Sadhukhan. Thereafter on 14th October, 2009 KMC Authority assessed the entire premises as vacant land with effect from 4/of 2006-07 and also assessed as separate unit for 4/of 2008-09. 1(c) Feeling aggrieved the petitioners filed writ petition being W.P No. 8287 (W) of 2010 which was disposed of on 10th September, 2009 after setting aside the valuation of Rs. 2,89,500/- with effect from 4/2006-07 thus directing the Hearing Officer to consider the valuation afresh by passing a reasoned order. Pursuant to the direction of the Hon'ble Court the respondent authority issued a fresh hearing notice and upon hearing the petitioners the Hearing Officer I passed a reasoned order on 16th September, 2009 whereby the Hearing Officer I on the basis of presumption reached to a conclusion that the entire existing structure was demolished before construction and there was no existence of Diagnostic Center at the time of construction and vacant land existed during the period of 4/of 2006-07.
(2.) Ms. Koyeli Bhattacharya, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner contended that during the impugned period of 4/2006-07 the work of the construction of the new building was under process. Therefore, it cannot be described that the premises at that material point of time was a vacant law. (Sic land)
(3.) Ms. Bhattacharya also contended that as some portion of the existing structure of the said premises is demolished whereby a vacant land was created for construction of the new building at the said premises. Therefore, the impugned assessment done by the respondent authority considering the entire premises as a vacant land is wholly illegal and patently bad in law (sic land).;