Kayan Jyoti Sengupa, J. - (1.) By this writ petition a notice to stop construction of building has been in pith and substance challenged. The writ petitioner No.1 is a promoter and developer. Under an agreement in writing followed by general power of attorney the writ petitioners started construction of a multi-storied building in the land having plot and/or dag Nos. 115, 214 and 215 situates within Mouja Golaghata in the district of 24-Parganas (North) being Premises No. 83, Golaghata Road, Calcutta. By virtue of the terms of the agreement and the power of attorney the writ petitioners duly applied to the Municipal authority namely, South Dum Dum Municipality for granting sanction to a building plan. According to the writ petitioners at the time of submission of the building plan a conversion certificate issued by the S.D.O Land and Land Reforms, Barrackpore was produced. The plan was sanctioned by the Municipal authority as submitted by the writ petitioners for construction of the building on 29th September, 1995. Thereafter, the writ petitioners started erecting building without any difficulty or obstruction until the time stated hereinafter. On 22 February, 1997 the Chairman South Dum Dum Municipality being the respondent No. 1 herein issued the impugned notice to stop construction. This notice to stop construction has been issued in pursuance of a complaint made by respondent No. 4 alleging that the writ petitioners have obtained the said plan upon suppression and/or misrepresentation of the material fact. The conversion certificate produced by the writ petitioners is not genuine and the same was not issued by the competent person. It is also alleged that the writ petitioners have been erecting building upon encroachment of a portion of the Government land. This is highly illegal. By the said complaint it was requested to the Chairman, South Dum Dum Municipality to cancel the sanction accorded to the said plan.
(2.) The writ petitioners herein challenging the aforesaid impugned notice to stop construction filed a writ to this Hon'ble Court which was registered and marked as No. 13166(W) of 1997. The said writ petition was dismissed by the learned Trial Judge holding inter alia that the writ petitioner raised disputed question of fact and all the contentions raised therein could be decided and adjudicated by the appropriate forum. Being aggrieved by the said order of dismissal dated 3rd July, 1997 the writ petitioners herein preferred an appeal. The said appeal was admitted and marked as.....The appeal was disposed of by the Division Bench of this court on the basis of an agreement and/or concession arrived at by and between the writ petitioner (the appellants therein) and the respondents. By the said agreed terns it was decided amongst others that the writ petitioners herein would make a representation before the Chairman, South Dum Dum Municipality who shall decide in accordance with law on the question of legality and validity of the stop construction notice. The Chairman in terms of the said order upon giving hearing to all concerned has decided the point raised by the parties by an order dated 3rd November, 1997. By his aforesaid order he has retained and/or upheld his previous notice to stop construction.
(3.) By the subsequent writ petition being the present one the petitioners before me have challenged the findings of the order and decision of the Chairman as well as the notice to stop construction.;