29.09.2026 sayandeep Sl. No. 55 Ct. No. 03 WPA 26368 of 2026 Om Prakash Jaiswal & anr. Vs. KMC & ors. Mr. Jishnu Chowdhury, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arnab Sardar Mr. souradeep Banerjee Mr. Andolan Sarkar Mr. Santosh Singh …. for the petitioners Mr. Ajit Kr. Choubey Mr. Dipanjan Sinha Roy ….. for the Respondents Mr. Piyush Chaturvedi, Sr. adv. Mr. Bratin Kumar Dey ….. for the KMC in WPA 26368 of 2026, 1. The above writ petition has been filed challenging the notice dated 5th September, 2026 whereby the petitioners’ business run under the name and style of OM Guest House and Banquet from premises No. 1032, Laskarhat has been directed to be closed and certificate of enlistment suspended . 2. Mr. Chowdhury, learned senior advocate appearing in support of the instant writ petition would submit that the petitioner No. 1 carried on business of Guest House and Banquet Hall from premises No. 18 Tagore Park Main Road, Kolkata being 1032, laskarhat (hereinafter referred to as the said premises). According to the petitioners, the WPA 26368 of 2026 2 petitioners have all requisite license for carrying on the business operations. He has also drawn attention of this Court to the certificate of enlistment issued by the municipal authorities and would submit that the certificate of enlistment issued in favour of the petitioner no.1 is valid till the financial year 2026-27. It also is the petitioners’ case that although, an inspection was carried out by the members of the Joutha Committee in terms of the office order No. 33 dated 19th August, 2026, the report thereof was not supplied to the petitioners. 3. Notwithstanding the aforesaid, on 5th September, 2026, the above notice was issued complaining violation of Section 416 of the Kolkata Municipal Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) for the petitioners carrying on business operations of a Guest House and Banquet from a residential/non- residential G+III storied building without requisite permission. According to such notice, the business was also being conducted from the said premises without obtaining appropriate certificate of enlistment from the license department. Mr. Chowdhury would submit that the above would demonstrate complete non-application of mind on the part of the municipal Commissioner. 4. Independent of the above, he has also by drawing attention of this Court to the notice dated 5th September, 2026 would submit that a copy whereof WPA 26368 of 2026 3 which has been enclosed to the petition does not bear the original signature of the municipal Commissioner. A copy of the original notice has in fact been served on the petitioners by the Executive Engineer (Civil), Building Department/Borough XII, KMC. The aforesaid notice thus, appear to be mechanically issued. According to him, the municipal authorities without affording the petitioners with any opportunity of hearing has issued the notice of closure which itself is bad in law and should be set aside. 5. Mr. Chaturvedi, learned senior advocate appears for the KMC. He would submit that the aforesaid notice of closure was preceded by an inspection/enquiry carried out by the municipal authorities. Since in course of such inspections/enquiry, it revealed that the petitioners were carrying on business in violation of the provisions contained in Section 416 of the said Act, the above notice of closure has been issued. In response to a query of this Court he would, however, confirm the fact that the aforesaid notice has in fact been issued by the Municipal Commissioner though the copy which had been made over to the petitioners, records the signature as ‘Sd/-’. 6. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and having considered the materials on records, it would transpire that the petitioners’ business has been close down for the WPA 26368 of 2026 4 petitioners having failed to comply with the provisions of Section 416 of the said Act. As per the above notice, the petitioners are also running the business of Guest House and Banquet from the premises in question without taking appropriate permission from the municipal authorities. 7. On this score, I find that the provisions of Section 416 (5) proviso of the said Act makes it mandatory for the municipal authorities to issue a show-cause before proceeding to pass any order for infringement of the aforesaid Section. Admittedly, the same has not been done. Copy of the inspection report has also not been served on the petitioners. This apart, as pointed out by Mr. Chowdhury, the petitioners are holding a valid certificate of enlistment, and police licence. Having regard thereto, at this stage without deciding on the validity of the inspection report of the Joutha Committee, the above notice which directs closure of the petitioners’ business and the suspension of the petitioners’ certificate of enlistment, in my view, cannot be sustained as having been issued in colourable exercise of power, and the same is accordingly set aside, leaving it open to the municipal authorities to take steps as may be advised in accordance with law. 8. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)