Subrata v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
With the above, the writ petition stands disposed of
Provisions considered
- Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 s. 411(1)
Judgment
Operative part
Mr. Moniruzzaman Mr. Manzir Alam Sk. Morshed …for the petitioner Mr. Himadri Sikhar Chakraborty Mr. S.T. Mina …for the State Mr. Gopal Chandra Das Mr. Rudranil De …for the Corporation Mr. Debasish Kundu Mr. Souma Subhra Roy …for the private respondents The petitioner in this writ petition intends to comply the direction given in the notice issued under section 411(1) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 dated July 20, 2022. The petitioner submits that he is willing to take steps in accordance with the said notice but is unable to do so because of the resistance raised by the private respondents. Learned advocate representing private respondents submits, upon instructions, that they do not have any objection if the petitioner acts in accordance with the notice dated July 20, 2022. It appears from the notice that the works mentioned therein are to be done under strict supervision of LBS/ESE of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation. 2 It will be open for the petitioner to act in accordance with the said notice under the supervision of LBS/ESE of the Corporation. With the above, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. The instructions given by the Executive Engineer (Civil)/Build. Br-XV signed on December 8, 2022 be retained with the records. Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, shall be made available to the parties after compliance of all legal formalities. [Amrita Sinha, J]
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With the above, the writ petition stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 — s. 411(1).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.