Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 329 (CAL)

STATE OF WEST BENGAL v. Hazi Ramjan Ali Mondal

2007-05-03

BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, KISHORE KUMAR PRASAD

body2007
Judgment :- (1). THIS application under Articles 226/227of the Constitution of India is at the instance of State of West Bengal and is directed against order dated 5th December, 2001 passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms and tenancy Tribunal by which the tribunal allowed an application filed by the respondents thereby giving opportunity of retention of the land in terms of section 6 (5) of the West Bengal Estate Acquisition Act. (2). THE grievance of the applicant before the Tribunal was that in proceeding under Section 6 (5) of the Estate Acquisition Act, in the name of Kaluruddin Mondal, the father of the present applicant, the Revenue officer passed an order to the effect that all the lands held by Kaluruddin mondal should vest in the State because the return in Form b and the statement in Form - i had not been filed. (3). THE Tribunal, on consideration of the materials-on-record, namely, the certified copy of the order passed in the said B.R. Case, came to the conclusion that the Revenue Officer concerned passed an order on 14th September, 1987, to the effect that as the intermediary did not opt to retain land, they could not be allowed to retain any land. (4). IN such situation, the Tribunal was of the view that the concerned revenue Officer acted in violation of the provision under Section 6 (5) of the Estate Acquisition Act, and such order of vesting was not sustainable. (5). THE Tribunal set aside the order of vesting with a direction upon the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Canning-l, to initiate fresh proceeding under Section 6 (1) of the Act to determine the question of retention of land held by Kaluruddin Mondal under Section 6 (1) of the Act. after giving opportunity of being heard to his legal heirs and representatives to opt in accordance with the law. (6). BEING dissatisfied, the State of West Bengal has come up with the application under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. (7). MR. Panja, the learned Advocate, appearing on behalf of the writ-petitioner, tried to impress upon us that previously an opportunity was given to the heirs of Kaluruddin Mondal to exercise such option. (8). (6). BEING dissatisfied, the State of West Bengal has come up with the application under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. (7). MR. Panja, the learned Advocate, appearing on behalf of the writ-petitioner, tried to impress upon us that previously an opportunity was given to the heirs of Kaluruddin Mondal to exercise such option. (8). IT appears from record that subsequently, by order dated 14th September, 1987 the concerned Officer held that it should be presumed that the ex-intermediary had got lands elsewhere and the entire plots of kaluruddin Mondal were directed to be vested. In our view, the aforesaid presumption taken by the concerned officer was incorrect, and in such a situation, the Tribunal having given opportunities to the heirs of Kaluruddin mondal to exercise such option, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. (9). MR. PANJA further tried to impress upon us that in the meantime during mischief period, various lands have been transferred, and, as such, no further opportunity should be given. Once an opportunity has been given to exercise option, the State will not suffer any loss in view of the fact that if any land transferred during the mischief period was really transferred with mala fide intention, the State was free to initiate proceeding under Section 5a of the Act and in such case, the transferee in respect of those transactions would not get any title over the land. (10). WE, thus, find no reasons to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. (11). THE order passed by the Tribunal should be complied with within three months from today. (12). WITH the above observation, this Tribunal application and the connected application thus disposed of.