Stephen Court after the March 23 blaze

Peter Cat’s plea to stall a Calcutta Municipal Corporation move to demolish the restaurant’s mezzanine floor may have opened a Pandora’s box and landed several occupants of the fire-ravaged Stephen Court in trouble.

A high court division bench on Monday directed the CMC to identify all unauthorised constructions in the Park Street landmark and demolish them. The fire services department has been asked to file a report within two weeks on whether all occupants of Stephen Court followed the fire safety norms.

Peter Cat owner Nitin Kothari had moved the high court challenging a CMC notice threatening not to renew the restaurant’s licence if the management failed to establish that the mezzanine floor was legal.

Justice G.C. Gupta asked the CMC to act according to the rule — which allows the civic body to raze illegal structures — if the owner failed to produce documents in support of the construction, prompting Kothari to move a division bench.

The division bench of Justice K.J. Sengupta and Justice Kanchan Chakrabarty said on Monday: “The director-general (building) of the CMC should inspect Stephen Court to find out whether any of the occupants had made any construction without obtaining proper permission. If any occupant is found guilty, the CMC will take appropriate action in accordance to its rule.”

The civic notice, issued by the director-general a month ago, asked Kothari to produce all papers related to the construction of the mezzanine floor and documents to prove that he had obtained the fire services department’s clearance.

Monday’s order means many parts of Stephen Court now face demolition.

CMC lawyer Alok Ghosh said: “Many occupants have made illegal constructions within their areas. I told the division bench that the illegal structures in the building were one of the main reasons behind the death of so many people in the fire.”

The March 23 blaze had killed 43 people.

The building even has an entire restaurant operating from a mezzanine floor.

The division bench asked Ghosh why the civic body had not taken any action against the occupiers who had set up illegal structures. “If your client took action in time, many lives could have been saved.”

The lawyer conceded that the CMC had woken up late. “The real picture of the building came to light only after the fire. The civic body is taking steps to ensure that such a disaster doesn’t recur,” Ghosh said.

Justice Gupta had held that renewing licence and demolishing illegal structures were two different issues. “The CMC cannot close down the trade if the owner fails to furnish substantial documents in favour of construction. It can ask the owner to remove the illegally constructed part, if any.”

The Peter Cat owner was happy with the first part of the order but challenged the validity of the second.