Supreme Court: In a special leave petition filed against the judgment and order passed by the Calcutta High Court, wherein the Court has observed that the petitioner being a tenant has no right to participate in the demolition proceeding nor is there any requirement to serve him any notice or communication of the demolition of the disputed building under Section of the (‘KMC Act , 1980’) as the Petitioner being the tenant/occupier has never contributed in the construction of the subject premises, the division bench of Abhay S. Oka and Augustine George Masih, JJ. before permitting the petitioner to apply for regularization, directed the petitioner and all adult members of his family occupying the premises to file an undertaking on oath in this Court stating that in the event, their application for regularization is rejected, within one week from the date on which the order of rejection is communicated to them, they shall unconditionally vacate the premises subject matter of this special leave petition.
The issue in this matter was that whether a tenant is entitled to a notice of demolition under Setion of and whether he has a chance to apply for regularization or file an appeal against demolition before Statutory Appellate Tribunal.
The petitioner contended that the High Court has failed to take into consideration that the petitioner is a tenant/occupier of the subject premises and has been residing at the subject premises since 1975-1977 ( around 50 years). The High Court erred in its interpretation of Section of the by giving a narrow connotation to the words ‘any person aggrieved’.
The Court initially took up this matter on 6-08-2024, and stayed the demolition of the subject premises of petitioner till 9-08-2024.
The petitioner has tendered across the Bar the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (Regularization of Building) Regulation, 2015. It was submitted that under the Regulation (4), the structure subject matter of this Special Leave Petition which is unauthorized can be regularized.
The Court before permitting the petitioner to apply for regularization, directed the petitioner and all adult members of his family occupying the premises to file an undertaking on oath in this Court stating that in the event, their application for regularization is rejected, within one week from the date on which the order of rejection is communicated to them, they shall unconditionally vacate the premises subject matter of this Special Leave Petition.
The Court granted two weeks time to the petitioner to produce the undertakings on oath.
Thus, while issuing notice to the respondents, continued the limited protection granted earlier.
The matter will next be take up on 23-08-2024.
CASE DETAILS
| Citation: Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 17797/2024 Appellants : Bijay Biswakarma Respondents : Rajkumari Devi Singh | Advocates who appeared in this case For Petitioner: Swarnendu Chatterjee, AOR , Deepakshi Garg, Adv. For Respondent: |
CORAM :
Abhay S. Oka, J.
Augustine George Masih, J.
The post appeared first on .