Authority: High Court at Calcutta (Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction) – Appellate Side

Order Date: 16 September 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: petitioner – All India Trinamool Congress; respondents – State of West Bengal, West Bengal Fire and Emergency Services (Director‑in‑Charge), CESC Ltd (owner of the premises), and other respondents.
  • Background: The Director‑in‑Charge issued an order on 4 September 2026 directing the petitioner to vacate the 6th and 7th floors of the building at premises no. 9, Abanindranath Tagore Sarani (Camac Street), Kolkata‑700 017, citing non‑maintenance and inadequacy of fire safety measures, deeming the occupancy unsafe and an imminent threat to life and property.
  • Lease Details: CESC Ltd entered into a lease deed with the petitioner on 1 March 2020 for the said floors. Clause 6.1.7 of the lease obligates the lessor to maintain statutory firefighting facilities and conduct periodic testing/certification; Clause 6.1.8 requires the lessor to provide NOCs for utility licences.
  • Notice & Reply: On 1 September 2026, the fire authority (respondent 4) served a notice of hearing to both the occupier (petitioner) and the owner (respondent 11). The petitioner replied on 3 September 2026, contesting the notice, stating no inspection report was provided, and asserting that fire‑facility responsibilities lie with the lessor per the lease.
  • Petitioner’s Submissions:
  • The alleged obstruction (a mild‑steel structure) has been removed; driveway is clear.
  • LPG cylinders previously stored on the 7th‑floor kitchen/cafeteria have been removed.
  • Fire‑sprinkler and smoke‑detector counts: approx. 60 sprinklers & 15 smoke detectors on the 6th floor; 45 sprinklers & 15 smoke detectors on the 7th floor.
  • Two entry/exit points exist for the 7th‑floor office corridor.
  • The butterfly valve in the riser system was non‑operational during inspection, causing low pressure at the 7th floor, but the system is otherwise maintained.
  • The petitioner expressed willingness to cooperate fully, obtain any required fire‑safety licence, and comply with any further inspection or remedial measures.
  • Authority’s Allegations (as per notice):

1. No valid renewal of Fire Safety Certificate; violation of Section 11C, West Bengal Fire Services Act, 1950.

2. Unauthorized mild‑steel structure with corrugated sheet roofing obstructing the driveway.

3. LPG cylinders stored on the 7th‑floor kitchen/cafeteria, not shown in approved plan.

4. Pump sequence not maintained; firefighting water absent in the riser system at 7th‑floor level.

5. Only one exit/entry from the office to the internal corridor on the 7th floor.

6. Inadequate/non‑functional fire alarm & detection system on both floors.

  • Legal Points Raised:
  • The petitioner argued that Section 11C, which imposes fire‑prevention duties on occupiers when the owner is untraceable, does not apply because the owner (CESC Ltd) is identifiable.
  • The petitioner contended that the impugned order was served only to the owner, not to the occupier, despite affecting the occupier’s rights.
  • Advocate General Surojit Nath Mitra argued the order is appealable under Section 11‑I of the Act and that the petitioner failed to apply for a Fire Safety Licence, thereby justifying the order.
  • The Court examined the applicability of Sections 11‑I and 38 (appeal provisions) and concluded they do not apply to an order issued under Section 37A (Miscellaneous Chapter), rendering the appeal route unavailable.
  • Procedural Observations:
  • The fire authority issued the impugned order on 4 September 2026, merely one day after receiving the petitioner’s reply, without conducting any further inspection.
  • The reply from the owner (respondent 11) was submitted at 16:32 on 4 September 2026, after the impugned order had already been passed.
  • The Court found that the authority neither considered the petitioner’s detailed reply nor provided any opportunity for the petitioner to remedy the alleged shortcomings before ordering evacuation and sealing.

Final Outcome

  • The Court set aside and quashed the impugned order dated 4 September 2026.
  • Respondent 4 (Director‑in‑Charge, West Bengal Fire and Emergency Services) is directed to:

1. Re‑consider the petitioner’s reply dated 3 September 2026.

2. Issue a fresh notice to the petitioner and conduct a fresh inspection of the premises.

3. If any further fire‑safety deficiencies are identified, inform the petitioner and allow reasonable time to rectify them.

4. Only after such notice and inspection may the authority take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law.

  • The writ petition (WPA No. 24876 of 2026) is disposed of.

Topics: Fire Safety Compliance, Lease Obligations, Judicial Review