- (1.) By consent of the parties, the appeal is treated as on day's list and taken up for consideration along with the application for stay.
(2.) The appeal arises out of an order passed by the learned Single Judge on 19th September, 2016 in WP No.793 of 2016 [Sachindra Nath Karmakar vs. Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.]. The appellant before us is the respondent no.4 in the writ proceeding who chose not to appear when the matter was taken up for consideration by the learned Single Judge. The writ petitioner, Sachindra Nath Karmakar, challenged an order passed by the Municipal Building Tribunal (being a statutory Tribunal). On 4th February, 2016, the Municipal Building Tribunal had allowed the statutory appeal of the respondent no.4 on a technical point. It said that the Special Officer had no jurisdiction to pass the demolition order. The jurisdiction to pass the demolition order was with the Commissioner. He could not have delegated his authority.
(3.) The learned Single Judge while deciding the issue as sought to be raised by the writ petitioner, looked into section 48 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. The following observations of the learned Single Judge are of relevance: "On an interpretation of sub-section [4] of Section 48 Mr. Justice Samir Kumar Mookherjee delivering the judgment of a Division Bench of this court held that since no rules had been prescribed the Commissioner could delegate any of his powers. Hence, the Commissioner had validly delegated his power to hear the demolition case to the Special Officer. This view has been subsequently followed by another Division Bench of this court in a judgment delivered on 14th January, 2016 in APOT no.8 of 2016 with WP no.824 of 2014 [Amalesh Adak and Anr. Vs. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.]. Both these decisions were considered by Mr. Justice Soumen Sen in another unreported decision of this court in CO no.3722 of 2015 [Md. Ayub and Anr. Vs. The Municipal Commissioner, KMC and Ors.] decided on 2nd March, 2016. ;