Leave granted.
From the impugned judgment of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High
Court affirming the decision of the learned Single Judge, these appeals are filed by
the Kolkata Municipal Corporation. The learned Single Judge has struck down
Section 275(1)(aa) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. Against the said
decision, number of Writ Appeals were filed by the Corporation. It appears from the
impugned decision that at one stage, the matter stood adjourned on the ground that
the State had agreed to amend the law. However, that did not materialize. By a
cryptic order, the Division Bench has stated that they have perused the judgment and
they did not find any scope for interference in the order of the learned Single Judge.
We are of the view that in matters involving constitutionality, it would not be open
for the High Court to dismiss Writ Appeals on such cryptic grounds.
..2/-
In the circumstances, we set aside the impugned judgment of the Division Bench and we restore A.P.O.No.233 of 2003 and other Appeals to the file of the
Kolkata High Court. We direct the High Court to expeditiously hear and dispose of
the said appeals in accordance with law.
At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the Corporation states that the
Corporation prays for stay of the judgment given by the learned Single Judge. We
cannot grant such a prayer particularly when we are setting aside the impugned
order passed by the Division Bench. However, it would be open to the Corporation to
move the Division Bench in the pending Appeals for interim relief, if so advised.
Civil Appeals are, accordingly, allowed with no order as to costs.
(AFTAB ALAM) New Delhi, January 16, 2009.