C.K. Banerji, J. - (1.) The petitioner No. 1 M/s, Radheshyam Sons Private Limited is a Private Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The petitioner No. 8 is a director of the petitioner No. 1. The petitioners Nos. 2 to 7 are individuals. The petitioner No, 1 is the owner of premises No. 228-A, Acharya Jagadish Boss Road, Calcutta (hereinafter called 228-A). The petitioners Nos. 2 to 7 are the joint owners of the premises No. 229 Acharya Jagadish Bose Road, Calcutta (hereinafter called 229). 228-A and 229 are contiguous plots.
(2.) The case of the petitioners is that on the 23rd June, 1974 the petitioners Nos. 2 to 7 entered into an agreement with the petitioner No. 1 for sale of 229 to tho petitioner No. 1 but the sale was not effected. On the 26th June, 1974 the petitioner No. 1 and tho petitioners 2 to 7 entered into an agreement for construction of a multistoried building on 228-A and 229 jointly until the purchase of 229 by the petitioner No. 1 was completed and thereby also agreed to apply to the Corporation of Calcutta, the respondent No. 1, for sanction of construction of the said building on 228-A and 229 and to submit jointly a plan for the same under the provisions of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1931 (hereinafter called the 1951 Act.) The parties also argeed to make an application for amalgamation of 228-A & 229 jointly to the respondent No. 1 and to be jointly and equally liable for all municipal rates, taxes, fees, rents etc. until the said sale in favour of the petitioner No. 1 was completed or further arrangements were done in accordance with law. Pursuant to the said agreements, on the 17th August, 1974 the petitioner No. 1 and the petitioners Nos. 2 to 7 jointly made an application to the respondent No, 1 under Rule 50 of Schedule XVI to the 1951 Act for sanction of an eighteen storied building Thereafter pursuant to directions of the officers of the respondent No. 1 the petitioners on the 7th October, 1974 jointly filed a revised plan for sanction of a ten storied building along with the requisite number of plans, both structural and elevation as required for sanction of construction of the said building. The said revised plan, for ten storied building war intended to be preliminary step for the sanction of the eighteen storied building for which plans were later submitted by the petitioners jointly. The petitioners deposited the requisite fees for sanction of the said revised plan The plans and the applications for sanction of the said plans were signed jointly by the petitioner No. 1 and the petitioners Nos. 2 to 7. On the 10th October, 1974 the petitioners were served with a notice in form 'C' under Rule 54 of Schedule XVI to the 1951 Act dated the 4th October, 1974 relating to their application for sanction of the eighteen storied building although they bad subsequently submitted a revised plan for a ten storied building on the 7th October, 1974. By a letter dated 25th November, 1974 the petitioners duly replied to the said notice Inter alia intimating that they had on the 7th October, 1974, filed a revised plan for a ten storied building and giving answers to all objections raised and/or informations required by the authorities of the respondent No. 1 in the said notice. On the 1st March, 1975 the said application of the petitioners for sanction of the ten storied building was placed before the Tall Building Committee wherein a resolution was passed and the plan submitted by the petitioners was approved on the 7th March, 1975. The Tall Building Committee, however, considered only the plan for the eighteen storied building under a misapprehension or misconception of facts as relevant matters were not properly placed before the said Committee by the authorities. On the 21st July, 1975 a meeting was convened on the 1st August, 1975 to consider the plan for the ten storied building recommended by the authorities and in the agenda of the said meeting it was mentioned "there was no objection, ride report dated the 24th December, 1974 by the Director of Fire Services to certain conditions."
(3.) In the mean time, the petitioners were served with a notice by the Calcutta Improvement Trust for acquisition of a portion of the land on the side of Landowner Road measuring about 20 to 25 ft. wide straight and 200 ft. long. The petitioners bad objected to the said acquisition but subsequently considering the public purpose thereof withdrew their objection and the Calcutta Improvement Trust acquired the said land on the 3rd October 1975 and took over possession thereof on the 5th April, 1975. The petitioners jointly filed an application to the respondent No. 1 for amalgamation of 228A and 229 under Section 175 of the 1951 Act, which was considered by the authorities and after a thorough enquiry and investigation,a report was made by the authorities on the basis of a report of the Assessment Inspector that amalgamation as prayed for was feasible but the petitioners were neither intimated of the result of the said application nor the same was refused.;