Summary
The Court quashed municipal notices alleging unauthorised non-domestic use of domestic water. Section 272(4) permitted wholesome water to replace unavailable unfiltered water, overriding the contrary restrictions relied on by the Corporation. The vague notice and failure to notify the known occupiers were additional defects. The Corporation retained liberty to begin fresh proceedings permitted by law.
Issues
- Whether non-domestic use of wholesome water violated municipal restrictions when no unfiltered water was supplied in the area.
- Whether the notice sufficiently specified a contravention and could proceed only against the owner without notice to the actual occupiers.
Provisions considered
- Sections 238, 271 and 272(4), Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980The overriding permission to substitute wholesome water where unfiltered supply was unavailable prevailed over the restrictions on non-domestic use; the trade licences also permitted and charged for that use. (¶¶ 9, 10, 11, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29)
- Section 275(1)(c), Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980As the disconnection power concerned an occupier’s contravention, the known occupiers should have been notified before their supply was threatened. (¶¶ 12, 25, 26)
- Sections 2(60), 2(62), 234 and 234A, Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980The Court considered the distinct roles of owner and occupier, the duty to supply water and recovery of charges in holding that proceedings should first have addressed the occupiers rather than only the residential owner. (¶¶ 5, 6, 7, 18, 25)
Held
- A notice must identify the specific contravention sufficiently to enable a meaningful answer. The general allegation under Sections 238 and 271 did not specify an actionable violation by the appellant and was liable to be quashed as vague and non-speaking. (¶¶ 16, 17)
- Section 272(4) overrides earlier provisions of the water-supply chapter, including Sections 238 and 271. Because the Corporation admitted that unfiltered water was unavailable locally, wholesome water could be used instead for non-domestic purposes. Trade licences permitting the relevant use and levying water charges reinforced the absence of the alleged contravention. (¶¶ 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29)
- The Corporation knew the identity of the commercial occupiers through the licences it had issued. It should first have notified them and attempted recovery from them before raising a demand against the owner. Their notice was also essential before invoking disconnection for an occupier’s breach of Section 238. (¶¶ 25, 26)
- The High Court orders and challenged notices were set aside. This did not prevent the Corporation from initiating fresh proceedings that were otherwise permitted by law. (¶¶ 30, 31, 32, 33)
Result
Appeal and writ petition allowed; Single Judge and Division Bench orders set aside and challenged notices quashed. Corporation at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings permitted by law; pending applications disposed of.