Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1405 (CAL)

Dibakar Chakrabarty v. State of West Bengal

2022-09-29

PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA, RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ

body2022
JUDGMENT : Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned action of the respondent authorities in allowing an illegal construction led by the private respondent No.10 on a land which is classified as a pond. 2. The facts in a nutshell are that Plot no. 1710 (Old RS Plot no. 301, 757, 758, 806, 807) under Mouza-Uttar Ghoshpara, J.L.No.23, Police Station and Block-Chakdah District-Nadia has been classified as a ‘Doba’ (Pond) in the records of rights since 1956. The said plot is located in an area where the petitioner has discharged with the duties of a Ward Co-ordinator, i.e., Ward No. 8 under the Chakdah Municipality. 3. The said plot which is a pond has been used by the inhabitants for more than fifty years. However, on 22nd March, 2020, a portion of that said pond, i.e., an area of 0.03 decimals was purchased by the private respondent No.10. 4. On getting the sanction plan from the Administrator of Chakdah Municipality being the respondent No.5, the private respondent No.10 tried to convert the said portion of plot to a Residential land/Bastu without getting any order of conversion from the collector of Nadia and the private respondent No.10 who is an employee of the West Bengal Health Service, tried to forcefully convert the disputed area of pond by filling it up with soil and bricks and started construction. 5. On 17th May, 2021 owing to such illegal construction the petitioner submitted his objection to the S.D.O. of Kalyani, Nadia as well as to the I.C. of Chakdah Police Station requesting the said authorities to stop such act and cancel the unlawful building plan. However, no actions were taken by the concerned authorities in stopping such illegal construction. 6. On 4th September, 2021 the petitioner lodged a complaint to the chairperson of Chakdah Municipality and IC of Chakdah Police Station against the illegal construction carried out by the private respondent No.10 and requested to take step against them. The said authorities passed an order asking the private respondent No.10 to stop the construction entirely until further notice. Despite the order passed by the Executive Officer of Chakdah Municipality, the private respondent flouted the orders and carried out the illegal construction. 7. The said authorities passed an order asking the private respondent No.10 to stop the construction entirely until further notice. Despite the order passed by the Executive Officer of Chakdah Municipality, the private respondent flouted the orders and carried out the illegal construction. 7. When all efforts to stop the illegal construction are in vain, the petitioner being a member of “Sabuj Mancha” which is an organization protecting the environment State wide filed the present petition before this Hon’ble Court. 8. Submissions of the Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner are : I. The act of the respondent authorities in not taking steps for stopping illegal construction made by private respondent No.10 in respect of a land, which has been classified as a pond/Doba as per the government records is illegal. Furthermore, in spite of an order passed by the S.D.O of Kalyani to stop the construction work, the Chakdah Police Station did not take any measure in restraining such illegal construction in the disputed plot. II. Section 4C (5) of The West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 states-“(5)” (a) Without prejudice to the foregoing provisions of this section, where any plot of land has been changed or converted or altered in violation of this section, if the Collector, on his own motion or on receiving information, is of the opinion that it is necessary so to do in public interest, he may make an order directing a raiyat or a lessee for restoration of the original character of the concerned land within a specified time. (b) On receipt of the order, the raiyat or the lessee shall restore the original character of the plot of land at his own cost within such time, as may be ordered by the Collector. (c) If the raiyat or lessee fails to comply with the order, the Collector may take action for restoring the original character of such plot of land and realise the cost for restoration from the raiyat or the lessee. (d) If the raiyat or lessee fails to pay the cost of restoration, the Collector may realise the cost as a public demand in accordance with the provision of the Bengal Public Demands Recovery Act, 1913 (Bengal Act No. 3 of 1913). (d) If the raiyat or lessee fails to pay the cost of restoration, the Collector may realise the cost as a public demand in accordance with the provision of the Bengal Public Demands Recovery Act, 1913 (Bengal Act No. 3 of 1913). In the present case, the private respondent without getting any permission from the competent authorities’ for conversion of pond to land, forcibly carried out illegal construction over the water body by filling up the area with soil and bricks. III. Moreover, the private respondent suppressed material facts in getting the sanction plan of the building in respect to the land being no. 1710 since the area has been classified as a “Doba” by the government and no construction can be allowed in such area characterized as a water bodies. Thus, the sanction plan for the building is void abinito. 9. The Learned counsel appearing for the Chairperson, Chakdah Municipality herein being the respondent No. 6 submits : I. The private respondent No.10 claiming himself to be the owner of the disputed plot had applied for the approval of the site for constructing a building as well as for granting permission to construct a masonry residential building to the respondent No. 6. Thereafter, a representation was made by the private respondent for sanction of building plan by providing the Records of Rights. The said Records of Rights classified the disputed plot as “AUSH”. Thus, based on the said application, an inspection was held by the competent staff of the respondent No.6 on 27th February, 2020. Since no existence of pond was found in the disputed plot, permission was granted to the private respondent for construction of the building. II. On 17th May, 2021 a complaint was received from the petitioner to the respondent No.6 stating that as per the records of the Revenue Authority of the Government of West Bengal, the disputed plot was classified as a “Doba”. Thus, by a letter dated the same day the complaint was filed, the Executive officer of the Municipality herein respondent No.7 directed the private respondent to refrain from any kind of construction work till any further notice as per the guidelines of the Government of West Bengal. III. Thus, by a letter dated the same day the complaint was filed, the Executive officer of the Municipality herein respondent No.7 directed the private respondent to refrain from any kind of construction work till any further notice as per the guidelines of the Government of West Bengal. III. On 3rd June, 2021, when the private respondent prayed for granting permission to construct the building, the respondent No.6 sent a letter dated 17th June, 2021 to the respondent No.9 requesting to supply information regarding the nature and character of the disputed plot. It was thus, discovered on receiving information from the respondent No.9 that as per the computerized land records, the said plot has been classified as a “Doba”. IV. Thus, contrary to what the private respondent had produced before the respondent No.6 that the disputed plot was “AUSH”, the land records as per the Government classified it as a “Doba”. 10. The Learned counsel appearing for the Block Land & Land Reforms officer being the respondent No. 9 submits : I. A notice dated 15th December, 2021 was issued under section 4C(5) of The West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 thereby directing the private respondent to restore the plot in question in its original condition within seven days from the receipt of the said notice. Moreover, another notice was issued on 23rd December, 2021 under section 4C (5) of The West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 for restoration of character of the land in its original condition. However, compliance was not made with the aforesaid notices. As a consequence thereof, on 7th July, 2022 the respondent No.9 brought the entire incident in front of the Additional District Magistrate and D.L.L.R.O of Krishnanagar in Nadia requesting an approval and/or orders directing the appropriate authority herein the respondent No.7 to restore the land to its original character. II. Therefore, in compliance to section 4D of The West Bengal Land Reforms Act,1955 an FIR was lodged on 9th July, 2022 against the private respondent No.10 for conversion of the area for making construction. 11. Submissions of the Learned counsel appearing for the private respondent No.10 are : I. The private respondent had purchased an area of 0.03 decimals in L.R.Plot No.1710 vide a registration deed of sale being No. 4410 in the year 2017. 11. Submissions of the Learned counsel appearing for the private respondent No.10 are : I. The private respondent had purchased an area of 0.03 decimals in L.R.Plot No.1710 vide a registration deed of sale being No. 4410 in the year 2017. After acquiring the land, the private respondent mutated the land in his name in the presence of R.O.R being L.R. Khatian No. 3411 and also recorded his name in the official records of the Chakdah Municipality. Thereafter, on applying for the sanction building plan to the concerned municipality for raising a dwelling house, the said authorities were pleased to sanction the plan. Thus, the house was constructed according to the sanctioned plan. II. The plot in question contains a vast area measuring about 92 decimals and since a long time there existed no “Doba”. Hence, as per records it was classified as an “ASUH”. Nonetheless, as per K.B. Khatian No. 2004 the said plot, i.e., R.S. No.807 was classified that plot a “Doba”. Although neither did there exist any “Doba” nor any low land. There were several masonry dwelling house buildings standing since long, the plans of which were sanctioned by the concerned Municipal authorities. III. Furthermore, the private respondent by no means have changed or converted the actual nature/classification of the purchased land in question. Rather the private respondent became victim to certain political and personal grudge when a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- was not paid to the petitioner as bribe, who happened to be the ex-councilor of the concerned Ward No.8. Therefore, no illegal act was undertaken at any point in time as long before the purchase of the land there existed no “Doba” in the said plot. IV. The nature of the L.R. plot No.1710 is a “Doba” as per official records however, there was not water body of lower land on the plot since time immemorial. Moreover, in the purchase deed the nature of use of the plot has been clearly mentioned as a “VITI”. The concerned registering authority assessed the valuation of the said area of land as per government norms and registered the said land as per the government rate of “VITI”. Moreover, in the purchase deed the nature of use of the plot has been clearly mentioned as a “VITI”. The concerned registering authority assessed the valuation of the said area of land as per government norms and registered the said land as per the government rate of “VITI”. V. There have been no violation of section 4C or 5 or any other provision of The West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 as the private respondent has not intentionally converted any portion of the land without the permission of the competent authorities. 12. Having heard the learned counsels for parties and on perusal of records, it is clear that notices dated 15th December, 2021 and 23rd December, 2021 issued by the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer directed the private respondent to restore the land in its original condition. The Chairman, Chakdah Municipality has also clarified from the computerized Land Records that the said plot has been classified as a “Doba”. In the instant case, the private respondent No.10 have flagrantly violated the provisions of law relating to conversion of the classification of land under the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 and constructed a brick walled building over a waterbody. The Block Land & Land Reforms officer being the respondent No.9 as well as the Chairperson, Chakda Municipality being the respondent No.6 have failed to stop the private respondent from such conversion of the plot of land classified as a waterbody. As there is no ambiguity regarding the classification of the land as a waterbody, the District Magistrate being the respondent No.2 is requested to direct the competent authority to demolish the building and restore the land in its original character. The respondent No.2 is also requested to file a compliance report before this Court within two months from date. 13. List on 5th December, 2022.