The Calcutta High Court has taken a stern stance against the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) for alleged non-compliance with a prior court order concerning the operation of a garment business at the ground floor of the Paradise Cinema Hall. The court’s directive had instructed the civic body to verify the legality of the business, specifically whether it adhered to zoning regulations.
The controversy revolves around the conversion of the ground floor of the three-storied Paradise Cinema Hall, originally designated as an ‘assembly building’, into a ‘mercantile building’ without the requisite legal sanctions. The petitioner argued that this change of use was executed without the necessary approvals from KMC, raising concerns about the adherence to the city’s building regulations and safety standards. During the proceedings, it was revealed that KMC had issued a certificate of enlistment online through its licence department. Additionally, a notice under Section 401 of the KMC Act, 1980, was served upon the party responsible for the alleged unauthorised use. However, the core issue remained whether the garment business was operating within the legal framework, as the court had ordered KMC to determine.
Justice, in her previous order, had mandated that the municipal commissioner facilitate a hearing with all involved parties to ascertain the legality of the business operations. The court had made it clear that if the concerned party failed to provide the necessary documentation proving compliance with zoning laws, KMC was to take immediate steps to cease the business activities. Despite these clear instructions, the petitioner’s counsel reported that KMC had seemingly circumvented the court’s directive, failing to provide a definitive answer on the legality of the business. The counsel pointed out that KMC had granted a two-week extension for document submission without clarifying whether any sanctions for change of use had been obtained, thus potentially undermining the court’s specific order.
In response, Justice issued a fresh directive, stating, “The said authority was directed to ascertain whether the business was run according to law or not. The finding whether the business is being run according to law or not is not clear from the order passed by the additional municipal commissioner on 24 July 2024.” The court further instructed that a copy of the contempt application be served upon the alleged contemnors and ordered the filing of an affidavit of compliance by the next hearing date. The matter has been scheduled for further hearing on September 2, 2024. This case underscores the judiciary’s role in upholding legal compliance and accountability within civic bodies. The outcome could set a significant precedent for how municipal authorities in Kolkata, and potentially other cities, handle zoning and land use regulations in the future. The KMC’s actions, or lack thereof, will be closely scrutinised in the coming weeks as the court examines whether the civic body has fulfilled its legal obligations in this matter.
