HARISH TANDON,J. - (1.) The Court : This matter has a chequered history. On the basis of a complaint lodged by the petitioner before the Corporation authorities that the private respondents have made unauthorised and illegal construction, a proceeding was initiated under Section 400(1) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. The Special Officer (Building) passed the order of demolition holding that the private respondents are guilty of making illegal construction. The said order was passed as per back as 12th April, 2012.20The private respondents challenged the said order in B.T. Appeal No.64 of 2012 before the Building Tribunal. The said appeal came up for consideration on 4th February, 2016 and the order of demolition was set aside. It was observed by the Tribunal that in absence of any sanctioned plan the Corporation authorities ought not to have formed an opinion that the construction was made in deviation therefrom. Another point was taken therein that whether the Special Officer (Building) has jurisdiction and authority to pass an order under Sub-section(1) of Section 400 of the said Act. However, liberty was given to the Corporation to initiate a fresh demolition proceeding in the light of the observations recorded therein. The order of the Tribunal was further challenged by the petitioner before this Court in WP No.793 of 2016. This Court, however, found that the findings recorded by the Tribunal in the said appeal was erroneous and set aside by remanding the matter to the Tribunal to decide the same afresh. The Appeal against the said order was disposed of by affirming the same with an additional direction upon the Corporation authorities to produce the relevant records. After remand the matter was further decided by the Tribunal. It was observed that the Municipal Commissioner has delegated its power upon the Special Officer (Building) and, therefore, he is competent to decide the demolition proceeding. Ultimately, the Tribunal did not find any infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the Special Officer (Building) and dismissed the said appeal. The order of the Building Tribunal was challenged in WP No.87 of 2017 and a point was sought to be raised that the Tribunal failed to consider the implication of Section 23 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 which expressly debars any employee or officer of the Corporation to be re- appointed after superannuation without obtaining prior sanction from the State. This Court noticed the scope of remand and did not allow to enlarge the jurisdiction by permitting such plea to be taken by the private respondents. The Court while dismissing the said writ petition observed that there was a limited issue and the issue before the Tribunal was restricted to whether the Municipal Commissioner has, in fact, delegated its power in exercise of powers under Section 48 of the said Act upon the Special Officer (Building).
(2.) The order of Single Bench was challenged before the Division Bench in APOT No.103 of 2017 and the Division Bench upon considering all issues raised before it affirmed the order of the Single Bench both on merit as well as on law. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner alleging that despite the order of demolition passed by the Special Officer (Building) and affirmed by the Building Tribunal as well as this Court, the Corporation is showing reluctance in implementing the said order.
(3.) On the other hand, it is submitted on behalf of the private respondents that they have approached the Building Tribunal by filing a review application and the same is fixed on 19th July, 2017. On being asked whether any interim order is passed by the Building Tribunal which may stand in the way of the authority of implementing the order of demolition, it is submitted by the private respondents that the Building Tribunal has not passed such order.;