TAPABRATA CHAKRABORTY, J. - (1.) Formally, two appeals have been preferred against an order dated 24th March, 2015 passed upon analogous hearing of two writ applications being W.P. No.39 of 2012 and W.P. No.487 of 2014 and as common questions of law and facts are involved, both the said appeals are taken up for analogous hearing.
(2.) The short point which arises for consideration in the present appeals is as to whether in terms of the provisions of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the KMC Act) and the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Building Rules, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as the KMC Rules), the tenants and occupants of a building are required to be heard by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the KMC) authorities while considering an application for re-erection of the said building submitted by the owner and prior to grant of formal sanction of the building plan.
(3.) The matter has a chequered history. The writ petitioner/appellant herein is the owner of the land at premises nos.19A and 20, Strand Road, Calcutta-700001, at premises no.23A Netaji Subhas Road, Calcutta-700001 and at premises nos.25 and 27, Netaji Subhas Road, Calcutta-700001 and of the buildings and structures thereupon. All the nine premises are now amalgamated and renumbered as 25, Netaji Subhas Road, Calcutta-700001 (hereinafter referred to as the said premises). The said buildings are occupied by various tenants and occupants. Twice a fire broke out at the said premises on 24th May, 1980 and 20th December, 2006. In consideration of the ruinous state of some of the buildings, notices under Section 411 of the KMC Act were issued on 1st September, 2011 and 5th November, 2011. By the said notices the appellant was asked to secure and repair the building, if possible and also to demolish the dilapidated and damaged portions mentioned in the said notices. Alleging that the notices are vague, the appellant challenged the same by a writ petition being W.P. No.39 of 2012. With the passage of time the condition of the buildings further deteriorated. The appellant approached the KMC authorities by representations dated 12th December, 2011, 8th August, 2013, 14th August, 2013, 25th March, 2014 and 2nd May, 2014 with a prayer to take appropriate steps for demolition of buildings in terms of Section 411 of the KMC Act. As no steps were taken, the appellant preferred a further writ petition being W.P. No.487 of 2014. Both the writ petitions were thereafter heard and by the order impugned in the present appeal, the learned Single Judge directed the KMC authorities to dispose of the pending applications for amalgamation of the nine premises in question. By the said order it was also observed that "in the event approval of the plan is made by the Corporation, it will not be formally sanctioned unless and until the learned counsel appearing today are heard by this Court with regard to the plan". Pursuant to the said order and upon considering the pending applications, the KMC authorities passed an order of amalgamation of the said premises on 9th April, 2015. Thereafter, on 15th June, 2015 the appellant preferred the instant appeal. To resolve the dispute, this Court by an order dated 16th February, 2016 directed the appellant to furnish the plan along with a statement giving details where it proposed to relocate each of the tenants, who are in occupation, including the details of measurement of the area it proposed to allot. Pursuant to the said order a rehabilitation proposal was filed and by an order dated 16th August, 2016 the parties were given liberty to put their objections by way of an exception to the proposed plan. By the said order it was also observed that the appellant would be cautious enough to ensure that no occupant and tenant is evicted without due process of law but with a caveat that the occupants would face the consequence "if anything happens to the building on its own". On 22nd August, 2016, some of the tenants mentioned the matter alleging that the KMC authorities have started demolishing the buildings forcibly and as such this Court directed the learned counsel appearing for KMC to inform the officer of the Municipal Corporation both telephonic and otherwise to stop the demolition work of the premises. It was also directed that the police authorities will not act contrary to the order passed on 16th August, 2016. The said interim order has been extended from time to time. ;