- (1.) The writ petitioners challenge the letter dated November 24, 2008 issued by the Licence Officer of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation demanding a sum of Rs.96,200/- on account of failure of the first writ petitioner to obtain trade licence and the notice dated March 24, 2009 being a notice for execution of distraint warrant. The writ petitioners contend that as a private members club, the writ petitioners are not required to obtain any licence under the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. They also contend that none of the sections quoted in the letter dated November 24, 2008 of the Corporation are attracted to the first writ petitioner and as such the quantum charged to the first writ petitioner is not payable. The writ petitioners also contend that in view of Section 627 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, the Kolkata Municipal Corporation has no jurisdiction to claim any amount from the first writ petitioner as the club premises of the first writ petitioner is located in the part of Hastings which is under the control of General Officer Commanding of the Eastern Command.
(2.) On behalf of the Corporation authorities it is contended that, the first writ petitioner is liable to pay the fees claimed from it by the letter dated November 24, 2008. It is submitted that, the writ petitioners are enjoying municipal facilities at the club premises and, therefore, they are obliged to pay for the same. Relying upon (Calcutta Swimming Club & Anr. v. Kolkata Municipal Corporation, 2010 2 CalHN 580) it is submitted that, the first writ petitioner although located within the area under the command of the General Officer Commanding, Eastern Command, the first writ petitioner is liable to pay the fees levied by the Corporation. Activities of the first writ petitioner although located in such region, are guided by the provisions of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980.
(3.) I have considered the rival contentions of the parties and the materials made available on record.;