Back
High Court Of Calcutta
Pratap Kumar Ray
SRI BIBHUTI BHUSAN DHARA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL - Respondent
C. O. 4314 (W) Of 1991
Decided On : 02/08/2005
LAND ACQUISITION - REQUISITION AND ACQUISITION - VALIDITY - PUBLIC PURPOSE - CONSTRUCTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING - RELIGIOUS PLACES - STATUTORY EMBARGO - WEST BENGAL LAND (REQUISITION AND ACQUISITION) ACT, 1948 (ACT II OF 1948), SECTION 3.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Pratap Kumar Ray, challenged the requisition and subsequent acquisition of his land for the construction of an administrative building for the Bagnan-II Development Block. The petitioner contended that the requisition and acquisition were illegal as the land was used for religious purposes and that the notices were not served to all the co-owners. The State respondents contended that the land was recorded as agricultural land and that the petitioner had not obtained permission to convert the land for non-agricultural purposes. They also argued that the construction of the administrative building was a public purpose and that the requisition and acquisition were carried out in accordance with the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the requisition and acquisition were valid and that the petitioner was not entitled to any relief. The court found that the land was recorded as agricultural land and that the petitioner had not obtained permission to convert the land for non-agricultural purposes. The court also found that the construction of the administrative building was a public purpose and that the requisition and acquisition were carried out in accordance with the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948.
Issues: 1. Whether the notices were duly served in terms of Section 3 of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948? 2. Whether there was a public purpose to construct the administrative building of the Block Development Office in terms of the statute and the State Government had the power to follow the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 to acquire the land in question?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the notices were duly served in terms of Section 3 of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948, as they were served to the petitioner, who was the occupier of the land, and to the recorded owner from whom the petitioner purchased the land. 2. The court held that the construction of the administrative building was a public purpose as it would provide essential services to the community and improve living conditions in the rural area.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition and held that the requisition and acquisition were valid.
( 1 ) HEARD the learned Advocates appearing for the parties.
( 2 ) IN this writ application the writ petitioner has prayed the following reliefs:-" (a) Writ in the nature of Mandamus shall not be issued commanding the respondents to restrain from giving any effect or further effect to the impugned Memo No. 1258 dated 21. 3,1991 and/or order issued by the District Magistrate, Howrah and the collector, Howrah to do all acts for the purpose and also steps sought to have been taken by the authorities concerned in any form or manner whatsoever and/or to show-cause as to why the said Memo and/or order which is Annexure 'd' to this application and steps taken on the basis of the said Memo and /or order shall not be set aside and/or cancelled ; (b) To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari asking the respondents to show-cause as to why the said memo order dated 21. 3. 1991 which is annexure 'd' to this application and also purported steps sought to have been taken as complained of, shall not be set aside and/or quashed; (c) To issue any other appropriate writ or writs ; (d) To issue appropriate order directing the respondents concerned to certify and bring before this Hon'ble Court all papers and records connected with the impugned Memo and/or order which is Annexure 'd' to this application in respect of the area measuring 18 decimals or land of the said plot No. 88 and/or all other papers connected therewith within such time as may be passed; (e) To issue appropriate order or direction restraining the respondents, their agents and officers, subordinates and all other working under them from giving any further effect to the impugned notice which is annexure 'd' to this application and also steps taken in connection with the said Memo and/or order and all orders made and/or steps taken in pursuance thereof in any form or manner whatsoever; (0 An ad interim order of injunction in terms of Clause (e) above; (g) To pass such further order or orders as to this Hon'ble Court might seem fit and proper. "
( 3 ) THE impugned order being Annexure D of the writ application is a notice of requisition under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 hereinafter referred to for brevity as west Bengal Act II of 1948 whereby and whereunder for construction of administrative Building of Bagnan-ll Development Block, the land of the writ petitioner was under requisition notice issued by the competent authority. This writ application was affirmed on 1st April, 1991. During pendency of the writ application by publication of a notice gnder Section 4 sub-section 1 (a) of the said Act in the Calcutta Gazette, extra ordinary dated Friday 24th October, 1993, the concerned land of the petitioner within R. S. Plot No. 88 Mouza gunanandapur, J. L. No. 80, P. S. Bagnan, Dist. Howrah, was acquired. Petitioner filed a Supplementary Affidavit subsequent to filing of the writ application, contending, inter alia, that in the concerned plot he got the ownership of 0. 6 decimal areas out of total 18 decimal areas and constructed a temple of Radha gobinda Jew.
( 4 ) THIS writ application was moved in the year 1991 before Tarun chatterjee, J. (as His Lordship then was) ex-parte and no interim order was passed at that stage. Subsequently, by the order dated 7th December, 1995 altamas Kabir, J. at present the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice, only directed maintenance of status quo in respect of the temple in question. Though the acquisition of the concerned land covered under the requisition notice was completed on 24th October, 1993 by issuing a public notice but no challenge has been made in this writ application by amendment of writ application.
( 5 ) THIS writ application has been opposed by the State respondents by filing their Affidavit-in-Opposition and on contending, inter alia, that the petitioner was duly served with the notice of the requisition and following the rules, acquisition proceeding
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
