Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 358 (CAL)

Anil Kumar Bhalotia v. State of West Bengal

2017-04-04

HARISH TANDON

body2017
JUDGMENT : 1. As prayed for, leave is granted to the petitioners to add the Director General, West Bengal Fire Services as well as the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Bidhannagore as party respondents in the instant writ petition. 2. The learned advocate representing the State submits that he can appear on behalf of those added respondents, being the part of the State instrumentalities. 3. It is really unfortunate that the Municipality is apathetic and acting in a lethargic manner in not processing the application seeking permission to hold Ram Nabami Puja on 5th April, 2017. 4. The application with the Municipal authorities was submitted on 22nd March, 2017, yet no action is taken thereupon and the said application is kept in suspended animation, unless the aggrieved persons approaches the Court and seek directions in this regard. 5. It is not in dispute that in the last year the similar permission was sought for holding the Ram Nabami Puja at the same site, which was granted by the South Dum Dum Municipality with conditions. The said permission is annexed at page 37 of the instant writ petition. 6. The Municipality says that unless the necessary permission from the Fire Brigade Department and the Police administration are obtained, it would not be possible for them to issue the permission. 7. My attention is drawn to the permission granted by the Municipality in the last year. 8. All the conditions, which had been taken as grounds for non-processing the said application, had been indicated therein and the said permission was subject to obtaining clearance certificates from the aforesaid Departments. 9. There is no hesitation in my mind that those conditions cannot stand in the way of the Municipality in granting permission, as permission would always be subjected to such permissions. 10. The learned advocate for the State representing the Police administration innocuously submits that unless the permission is obtained from the concerned Municipality, the police authorities cannot proceed with the application, if filed by the petitioners. 11. It is further submitted that the said application has not been filed with the Police administration and, therefore, they have been unnecessarily impleaded as party in the instant proceeding. 12. The petitioners say that the Police administration shall not accept the application, unless the permission from the Municipality is shown and enclosed therewith. 13. 11. It is further submitted that the said application has not been filed with the Police administration and, therefore, they have been unnecessarily impleaded as party in the instant proceeding. 12. The petitioners say that the Police administration shall not accept the application, unless the permission from the Municipality is shown and enclosed therewith. 13. What appears from the above that the permission of the Municipality is sine qua non to the other permissions, vis-à-vis permission from the Fire Brigade Department as well as the Police administration. 14. The said Puja is scheduled to be held tomorrow. 15. This Court, therefore, does not find any justification in the stand of the Municipality in keeping the said application in abeyance for indefinite period of time. 16. This Court, therefore, directs the Chairman of South Dum Dum Municipality to accord permission in the manner as has been done in the last year in course of this day. 17. The said Chairman shall act on the basis of the communication made by the learned advocate representing the petitioners. 18. The learned advocate representing the Municipality is also directed to communicate this order to the Chairman to act accordingly. 19. It is open to the petitioners to apply before the Fire Brigade Department as well as the Police administration, if not already applied, who are also directed to take a decision before the scheduled date and time of the said Puja to be held at the site. 20. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. 21. There will be no order as to costs. 22. Let photostat plain copy of this order duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court) be given to the learned advocates for the parties on usual undertaking.