Remedies and Challenges in Construction Irregularities: Navigating the Legal Landscape for Resolving Grievances and Ensuring Compliance

Appeal against an order passed by the High Court of Calcutta concerning a contempt petition and a dispute over residential construction. The appellants challenge the court's jurisdiction in entertaining the writ petition, arguing it involves a private dispute. The court acknowledges this concern but notes the enquiry report finds no violation of building plans by the appellants. It grants the appellants liberty to challenge the show cause notice and enquiry report under the West Bengal Municipal Act, ensuring fair consideration without prejudice from other proceedings.

1. Background of the Appeal:

• The appellants seek to challenge an order by the High Court of Calcutta in MAT No. 2124 of 2023, which affirmed a previous order in Contempt Petition No. 694 of 2022.

2. Contention Raised by Appellants:

• The appellants argue that the directions issued by the Single Judge in the contempt petition directly affect their residential premises. They claim the dispute is a private matter and should not have been entertained by the court.

3. Arguments of Appellants' Counsel:

• Mr. Rana Mukherjee, representing the appellants, asserts that the writ petition involves a private dispute between neighbors and suggests that municipal authorities may be biased due to contempt proceedings.

4. Response from Respondent No. 1:

• Counsel for respondent No. 1 opposes the appellants' arguments, stating that the Single Judge's decision was justified after thorough consideration.

5. Court's Consideration:

• The court expresses reservations about the writ jurisdiction in a private dispute but acknowledges the presentation of an enquiry report finding no violation of building plans by the appellants.

6. Decision and Liberty Granted:

• The court grants the appellants liberty to challenge the show cause notice and enquiry report under the West Bengal Municipal Act, ensuring fair consideration without prejudice from other proceedings.

7. Conclusion:

• The appeal is disposed of with no order as to costs, and pending applications are disposed of accordingly.