Judgment : The Court: The petitioners in this WP under art.226 of the Constitution of India dated February 4, 2013 are seeking the following principal relief:- “a) A Writ in the nature of Mandamus Commanding the respondents to mutate the names of the petitioners in the Assessment Registrar under the Uttarpara-Kotrung Municipality;” Mr. Ghoshal appearing for the Municipality has submitted as follows. The petitioners’ mutation application was heard by the Chairman of the Municipality on March 27, 2009. The Chairman verbally informed the petitioners that it was impossible to direct mutation. The Chairman did not pass any written order. The Vice-chairman has sent by post a letter dated February 18, 2013 asking the petitioners to submit relevant documents. In view of the provisions of sub-s.(5) of s.116 of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 the Chairman of the Municipality was under a statutory obligation to pass an order disposing of the petitioners’ mutation application. Nothing empowered him to give a verbal decision. He heard the mutation application as back as March 27, 2009. He has not passed the order till today. On February 14, 2013 this Court passed an order directing advocate for the Municipality to ascertain when the petitioners’ mutation application was heard and why order was not passed till February 14, 2012. It is evident that because of the inquiry started by this Court, the Vice-Chairman woke up and sent by post a letter dated February 18, 2013. The contents of the letter dated February 18, 2013 are quoted below:- “It appears from our Municipal Assessment Register of Municipal Holding No.26, R.K. Street, Uttarpara that total area of land is measuring eight cottahs only. Sri Giridharilal Ghosh filed an application dated 19.7.2008 claiming the area of land in the said holding as 124 cottahs 7 chittacks. In spite of verbal promise made by the said Giridharilal Ghosh, no documents in support of the claim have been furnished till date. You are, therefore, requested to furnish relevant documents immediately for correction of Assessment record and after such correction the applications for mutation will be considered by the Board of Councillors.” It is evident that the Chairman did not give any attention to the statutory duty that he was to discharge. Quiet unauthorisedly he verbally informed the petitioners about the impossibility of ordering mutation and only after this Court started inquiry the Vice-Chairman wrote the letter dated February 18, 2013. Quiet unauthorisedly he verbally informed the petitioners about the impossibility of ordering mutation and only after this Court started inquiry the Vice-Chairman wrote the letter dated February 18, 2013. He had no authority to write the letter. He mentioned that the Board of Councillors would consider the application. No provision of law authorizes the Board of Councillors to decide the application. For these reasons, I dispose of the W P ordering as follows. Within a fortnight from the date this order is served the Chairman shall pay the petitioners Rs.3000 costs and decide their application for mutation after hearing them. He shall give the decision within two days from the date the hearing is concluded.