Monday, May 6, 2019

Sabita Chowdhury vs. The Raghunathut Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Calcutta High Court


W.P. No.553 (W) of 2019 (22/01/09)


An order of the Municipality rejecting renewal of a certificate of enlistment is under challenge in the present writ petition. 

Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that, this is the third writ petition for the purpose of granting a certificate of enlistment. He refers to the order dated September 5, 2018 passed in W.P. No.28999 (W) of 2017 (Smt. Sabita Choudhury v. The Raghunathpur Municipal Corporation & Ors.) and submits that, the Municipality despite such specific directions contained therein, passed the impugned order. He submits that, the Municipality be directed to issue the certificate of enlistment. 

State and the Municipality are represented. Learned advocate appearing for the Municipality submits that, the petitioner is in unauthorised occupation of land belonging to the State. Therefore, the Municipality cannot renew the certificate of enlistment. He relies upon (2011) 11 SCC 396 (Jagpal Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.) in support of his contention. 

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, his client is not in unauthorised occupation of the property concerned. He refers to the fact that, the Municipality demanded property tax from the petitioner and that, the petitioner paid the same. 

It is not within the jurisdiction of a Municipality to decide the title of an applicant for grant of certificate of enlistment. The provisions of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 requires the Municipal authority to consider an application for grant of certificate of enlistment only on the parameters as to whether the applicant is intending to carry on business or is carrying on business or not. In the present case, the petitioner seeks the certificate of enlistment in order to carry on business. Consideration of title is not material for the purpose of deciding the request of the petitioner. 

There subsists an order dated September 5, 2018 requiring the Municipal authority to dispose of the application for grant of certificate of enlistment on the parameters noted above. The Municipality has rejected the application by the impugned order on the ground that, the petitioner has no title to the land. The ground for rejection is without any basis. It is not within the jurisdiction of the Municipality to decide title. The impugned order dated December 28, 2018 is quashed. The Municipality will proceed to issue the certificate of enlistment to the petitioner within four weeks from date. Till such time the certificate of enlistment is not issued, the Municipality will not take any coercive measures against the petitioner for absence of a certificate of enlistment. It is clarified that, all directions contained in the order dated September 5, 2018 passed in W.P. No.2899 (W) of 2017 will remain. This Court has not decided on the title of the petitioner in respect of the land concerned. 

Jagpal Singh & Ors. (supra) consider a case of protection of common rights of the villagers in respect of common lands. In such context, it issued certain directions to the State Government to prepare a scheme for eviction of illegal/unauthorised occupants from such land. In the present case, there subsists a direction upon the Block Land & Land Reforms Officer requiring him to take appropriate steps, if he is so entitled, in law. Such direction appears from the order dated September 5, 2018 W.P. No.553 (W) of 2019 is disposed of. 

There shall be no order as to costs. 

Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of the requisite formalities. 

(Debangsu Basak, J.) 

Sourcehttps://indiankanoon.org/doc/10880518/

No comments:

Post a Comment