The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist), which sought protection against the alleged move by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and police to remove its temporary bookstall outside Jadavpur Coffee House during Durga Puja.
Justice Partha Pratim Roy held that the party could not seek judicial protection against the removal of the stall without establishing that it had obtained the necessary permission to operate it, Live Law reported. Since no such approval had been granted, the court ruled that the CPI(M) was not entitled to the relief it sought. The CPI(M) urged the court to prevent the authorities from forcibly removing or dismantling the bookstall without following the procedure established by law. It also sought directions for the municipal authorities to examine its application and issue a reasoned order if the permission issue remained pending. However, the court observed that the payment receipt had been issued subject to police clearance and that the party had ultimately not received permission to operate the bookstall. It had also ordered that the stall be removed promptly if the necessary approval had neither been sought nor obtained.
The CPI(M)’s Jadavpur 1 Area Committee had moved the High Court after alleging that municipal officials, accompanied by a large police contingent and a bulldozer, arrived at around 6.30 pm on October 17 and attempted to remove the temporary stall. The CPI(M) told the court that it had been setting up a bookstall outside Jadavpur Coffee House during Durga Puja for the past 49 years. This year, the party planned to operate a 16-foot-by-20-foot stall from October 13 to October 22. The party applied to the Kolkata Municipal Corporation for permission on September 19 and informed the officer-in-charge of Jadavpur Police Station about its plans, according to the petition. It also paid Rs 3,208 to the civic body for setting up the temporary stall.
Justice Partha Pratim Roy also referred to an earlier judgment by a Division Bench concerning a separate dispute involving a CPI(M) bookstall. In the earlier case, the Division Bench had directed the police to verify whether permission had been granted for setting up the stall.
