Kolkata: A Calcutta High Court division bench on Friday stayed a single-bench order to grant police protection to CPM for putting up a book stall in Bongaon for Durga Puja. The division bench also ordered the removal of all stalls, set up without permission, including that of Hindu Jagran Mancha, if it did not have the permission. “There needs to be equality in the eyes of law,” said the division bench, presided over by Chief Justice Ravindra Vithalrao Ghuge.The order of Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya was challenged before the division bench. The point of law on whether the matter should be heard by a judge hearing land matters or police action was challenged by the state. The CJ held that it would be decided after the Durga Puja vacation but stayed the single-judge order, stating that first jurisdiction needed to be decided upon.While directing the Bongaon police district SP and Bongaon Police Station IC, Justice Bhattacharyya had said no report was submitted by the state on the court’s query whether others, who had set up stalls beside a PWD road and on PWD land, had obtained permission from PWD or any other state authorities.The state on Friday submitted that they would find out if Hindu Jagran Manch was given the permission to erect the book stall. The Mancha built the stall reportedly after the CPM moved the Calcutta HC, alleging their workers were assaulted by the Mancha people on Oct 6 while they were putting up their book stall. “We, therefore, expect the Additional Advocate General to ensure the police authorities would investigate into whether Hindu Jagran Mancha has the permission to erect a book stall and if no such permission is sought and granted, immediate steps would be initiated to remove the said book stall,” the CJ held. He said, “Remove all the stalls, which do not have permission.”The HC also did not buy the CPM argument that for the past 50 years, permission for a roadside book stall during Sharodotsav/Durga Puja was never required reminding them it was also a “commercial activity”.Even the single judge was of the opinion that the same rules needed to be followed by all. Justice Bhattacharyya had called it “clearly bias” and observed, “I am directing the police authorities to take steps to clear it all. But it has to be after considering the highway authorities’ stand. One will not be permitted, others will be permitted. How can it be countenanced, be reasonable… . If highway authority comes and says before the court that nobody should be allowed to erect stalls, accordingly direction can be passed on to police authorities to run a bulldozer. To run a JCB within 24 hours, everything will be dismantled… . It will send the wrong message that one organisation is being permitted whereas petitioner is not being permitted.”Initially, the CJ wanted to know whether the CPM stall was on the same line as other stalls, but the state informed that they did not have the permission from PWD, which was needed. The counsel for CPM, senior advocate Samim Ahmed, suggested that the CPM could put a table and an umbrella instead of a stall to sell books, but the same was opposed by the state.
