Back
High Court Of Calcutta
CHITTATOSH MUKHERJEE, B. C. RAY
STATE OF WEST BENGAL - Appellant
Versus
KANAI LAL SAHA - Respondent
F. M. A. T. No. 3130 of 1978
Decided On : 12/19/1978
LAND REFORMS - Operation Barga - Recording of Bargadars - Interim order - West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 (West Bengal Act X of 1956), Ss. 50, 51, 51A - West Bengal Land Reforms Rules, 1965, Rr. 1, 21, 22 to 27, Sch. A, B.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, claiming to be owners of lands in Basanti, 24-Parganas, filed a writ petition challenging the State's 'Operation Barga' memo, which directed the recording of bargadars' names in the Records of Rights. The memo was issued under the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, and the West Bengal Land Reforms Rules, 1965. The petitioners sought to quash the memo and restrain the State from preparing the Records of Rights without following due process.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the impugned memo dated 5th July 1978 on the subject of 'operation Barga' was in the nature of administrative directions and had no statutory force. The processes or the stages in the settlement operation have been laid down in the relevant statutory Rules. The Government by their administrative orders cannot change these processes. In case of any inconsistency or repugnancy between the provisions of Chapter VII of the Act and the relevant Rules of the West Bengal Land Reforms Rules, 1965 on the one hand, and the directives of the State Government relating to 'operation Barga', on the other hand the statutory provisions must prevail and override the administrative directives.
Issues: 1. Whether the impugned memo dated 5th July 1978 on the subject of 'operation Barga' was valid and enforceable? 2. Whether the State Government could alter the processes for revision and preparation of records by administrative orders? 3. Whether the statutory provisions or the administrative directives would prevail in case of inconsistency or repugnancy?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The impugned memo dated 5th July 1978 on the subject of 'operation Barga' was in the nature of administrative directions and had no statutory force. 2. The processes or the stages in the settlement operation have been laid down in the relevant statutory Rules. The Government by their administrative orders cannot change these processes. 3. In case of any inconsistency or repugnancy between the provisions of Chapter VII of the Act and the relevant Rules of the West Bengal Land Reforms Rules, 1965 on the one hand, and the directives of the State Government relating to 'operation Barga', on the other hand the statutory provisions must prevail and override the administrative directives.
Final Decision: The Court clarified the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 17th and 20th November 1978, directing that the disposal of prayers for recording of the name of Bargadars would be only in accordance with the Chapter VII read with the relevant provisions of the West Bengal Land Reforms Rules and in particular the Schedule A. The statutory processes must (subject to their omission and/or amalgamation by necessary notification) be followed.
( 1 ) RESPONDENTS 1 to 57 to this appeal claim to be the owners of the lands situated in the different mouzas P. S. Basanti, District 24-Parganas. They have purported to give a detailed list of the lands allegedly owned by them in the Annexure 'a' to the writ petition filed by them. They have alleged that each of them personally cultivate the said lands and that none of these lands are cultivated by Bagadars. On 1st September, 1978 the Officer-in-Charge, Centralised Halka Camp, Basanti, 24-Parganas had issued a memo addressed to the Secretary to the local congress committee enclosing a list of mouzas where Operation Barga work would start very soon on priority basis. The said memo contained a list of proposed sites for offices for the aforesaid purpose. The respondents 1 to 57 herein in their writ petition have inter alia, prayed that the appellants in this appeal (the respondents in the writ petition) be commanded to cancel and re-call the aforesaid memo and to prohibit them from taking any steps in the Operation Barga. They have prayed for quashing of the impugned memo and the notice. Their writ petition also contains a prayer for issue of appropriate writs to command the respondents to the writ petition not to prepare any Record of Rights under S. 51a of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act without making a declaration and proclamation in the filed and without notice and without allowing the petitioner to take part in such proceedings and to place their case.
( 2 ) NINE other similar writ petitions were filed by others. On 15th of September 1978, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sabyasachi Mukharji was pleased to issue Rules upon ten writ petitions. His Lordship was pleased to grant interim orders to the extent that no further effect would be given to the impugned notice dated 1st September, 1978. The petitioners were given liberty to apply for further interim orders with notice. The learned Single Judge by his orders dated 22nd and 29th September, 1978, had extended the said interim orders. On 17th November 1978 and again on 20th November 1978 the learned Single Judge modified and clarified the aforesaid interim orders. The State and its officers have preferred the appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against orders dated 17th and 20th November 1978 passed in C. R. No. 8348 (W) of 1978 Kanailal Saha and ors. v. The State and ors. ).
( 3 ) THE appellants have filed an application for stay of the operation of the aforesaid two orders appealed against. The respondents have opposed the said prayer. At the outset it is necessary for us to point out that this order will not govern the present case (arising out of C. R. No. 8348 (W)/78) and at present we need not consider the correctness and propriety of the orders which might have been passed upon other writ petitions which have been filed, inter alia, challenging the 'operation Barga'. The State has not preferred appeals in respect of interim orders passed in other Rules and we are not aware whether or not the facts involved in the other Rules are similar and whether or not the grounds of challenge are identical. We have not also heard the learned advocates appearing for the different parties in the other Rules. Therefore, the order passed today will only govern the present appeal.
( 4 ) BEFORE we consider the submissions of the learned advocate for the appellants and respondents it is also necessary to briefly mention the back ground of this case. It appears that on or about 12th November 1973 the Governor of West Bengal, in the exercise of power conferred by sub-s. (1) of S. 51 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, had made an order directing that the Records of Rights in respect of the district of 24-Parganas be revised by a Revenue Officer in accordance with the provisions of Chapter VII of the said Act and the provisions of West Bengal Land Reforms Rules, 1965 in this behalf. On the same date, in exercise of the powers conferred by S. 3
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
