Calcutta High Court Declines Owners' Plea To Recall Order Permitting Usage Of Their Property's 'Ghat' For Celebration Of Chhath Puja

The Calcutta High Court has declined an intervention application by the owner of a property seeking to recall the court's earlier order allowing the usage of a ghat (river bank) situated on the premises of the property for the celebration of Chhath puja by people in the area.

A single bench of Justice Rai Chattopadhyay held:

"The applicants, thus, neither can be called a diligent litigant to be eligible for an equitable remedy, nor can be held to have been able to bring on record with sufficient precision, that fraud in accordance with law, has been committed upon them by the writ petitioner. The writ petition has already been disposed of. The applicants would have other remedies available, if adversely affected by the order of the Court. So far as recall of the order of the Court is concerned, within the limited scope of the existing and prevalent laws as regards the same, the present applications would not be maintainable."

The applicants were the owners of the property and sought recall of the Court's order permitting celebration of “Chhat Puja”, at the river bank (Ghat), within the premises of the property in question.

Senior Counsel for the applicants submitted that misrepresentation and fraud had been committed upon the Court, to secure an order behind the back of the applicants/property owners. He submitted that the applicants have deliberately not been made parties in the writ petition.

He stated that the applicants are the necessary parties, in the absence of whom the writ petition could not have been properly adjudicated or would have to be dismissed at the very threshold.

According to the counsel, the said order of the Court, allowing “Chhat Puja” at the same premises is not an order simply permitting Puja, but also contains several directions issued to the police authority, particularly to take into consideration and decide the objection raised by the applicants, regarding performance of “Chhat Puja”, in the said premises, owned by them.

It is indicated that the police was directed to search out an alternative suitable place/Ghat within the locality, for the performance of the Puja.

It was stated that there has been an absolute disregard for and disobedience by the police authorities, of the order of the Court, as above, in so far as no steps have yet been taken by it for compliance of the directions of the Court, as above.

On the contrary, the said order has been referred to, not in its proper perspective but in a manner to mislead the Court.

It was contended that the writ petitioner was allowed to perform Puja at the premises, only when no other suitable alternative place could be arranged for that. Therefore according to the applicants, there would not be any unrestricted, freehold right available to the writ petitioner to make use of the 'khas' property of the applicants, involving a large section of the population.

Hence, according to the applicants, who sought to join as parties in the case after the recall of the order, the said order was nullity due to fraud and misrepresentation, and that, the applicants being the owners of the property had the propensity to be adversely affected by an order of the Court with respect to the said property, would have been the necessary parties in the writ petition, without whom the matter could not have been properly adjudicated.

Senior Counsel for the writ petitioner/ respondent challenged the maintainability of the present applications. He said that upon disposal of the writ petition by Court's order dated October 30, 2024, the same has become 'functus officio'. Hence, no miscellaneous application can be taken out, to revive the proceedings.

It was stated that the only remedy is to prefer an appeal, against such an order. He stated that as per the settled law, a person, even if not a party to a proceeding but affected adversely by an order thereof, would be entitled to challenge the same before the higher forum. Hence, the application for recall of the Court's order dated October 30, 2024, would not be maintainable.

Counsel further said that due to the reason of “Chhat Puja” having been performed at the same place for years together, since 1996, the right to continue performance of Puja would emanate from the legitimate expectation evolving from the doctrine of past performance, though no particular form of legal right being existent there.

He referred to the letter of the writ petitioner dated October 25, 2024, to say that the petitioner has sought permission to perform Puja and ultimately has been granted, subject to certain conditions, which the petitioner is ready and willing to perform. He strongly denied the allegations of commission of any fraud and misrepresentation as alleged by the writ petitioner and submitted that the instant applications are liable to be dismissed.

Advocate General appearing for the state submitted that the police authority would never determine the rights of the parties in the property. He submitted further that the police authority is duty-bound to comply with the Court's order. In this regard, he informed the Court that in terms of the order dated October 30, 2024, necessary, proper and adequate arrangements have already been undertaken by the said authority.

Upon hearing the arguments, the Court found that the applicants though having reasonable apprehension as expressed in their letter before the police and the administration, had failed and neglected to take steps in order to protect their rights, if any, over the property or to save it from alleged misuse or being intruded as alleged.

Hence, the plea was dismissed.

Case: Bally Sarvajanik Chath Puja Samity & Ors Vs The State of West Bengal & Ors

Case No: WPA 26534 of 2024 With CAN 1 of 2024 & CAN 2 of 2024

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 232

Click here to read order