Back
1979 Supreme(Cal) 284
High Court Of Calcutta
D.K. Sen, J.
Prodyot Kumar Singha : Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal : Respondent
Decided on : July 31,1979
B.K. Panda, B. Panda, Banadm Dutta, N.L. Pal, P.N. Palit, Sailen Baxi,
The interest of non-agricultural tenants does not vest in the State under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953.
Headnote:
WEST BENGAL ESTATES ACQUISITION ACT, 1953 - SECTION 2(H), 2(I), 2(J), 2(K), 5(1)(A)(II), 6(1)(C) - NON-AGRICULTURAL LAND - VESTING OF RIGHTS - INTERPRETATION - COURT HELD THAT THE INTEREST OF NON-AGRICULTURAL TENANTS DOES NOT VEST IN THE STATE UNDER THE ACT.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, who were lessees of non-agricultural land used for holding markets and hats, challenged the order of the Assistant Settlement Officer holding that their rights in the land vested in the State under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953. They contended that their interest was not an intermediary interest and could not vest in the State under the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the land in dispute was non-agricultural land and that the petitioners were in actual possession of the said land exclusively subject to the claims of the respondent No. 12.
Issues: 1. Whether the interest of non-agricultural tenants vests in the State under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953? 2. Whether the petitioners, as lessees of non-agricultural land, are entitled to retain the land in their exclusive possession?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the interest of non-agricultural tenants does not vest in the State under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953. The court relied on the provisions of the Act, which define "intermediary" as a proprietor, tenure-holder, under-tenture-holder, or any other intermediary above a raiyat or a non-agricultural tenant, and "non-agricultural land" as land other than agricultural land or land comprised in a forest. The court also relied on several Supreme Court and Calcutta High Court decisions, which held that the interest of non-agricultural tenants is excluded from the definition of intermediary under the Act and does not vest in the State.
Final Decision: The court quashed the impugned order of the Assistant Settlement Officer and issued a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to forbear from giving any or any further effect to their decision contained in the impugned notice calling upon the public not to pay tolls and fees in respect of the said hat and market to persons other than the Government.
1. PRODYOT Kumar Sinha, since deceased and Bidyut Kumar Sinha are the original petitioners in this application. They claim to have been permanently settled in several plots of non-agricultural land being R. S. Plots Nos. 7617, 7618, 7620, 7622 and 7568 in Mouja Jhalda, Purulia, by the owners thereof, viz., the Debutter estate of Sri Iswar Muralidhar Jew Thakur acting through its then sebayit Uddhab Chandra Sinha, the Raja of Jhalda, under a registered Deed of lease executed on the 23rd April 1948. In terms of the said lease weekly cattle and vegetable markets and for hats as also daily markets are regularly held by the lessees on the said land and they collect tolls and fees from the persons using the said markets, On the 16th August 1972, the original petitioners submitted returns in the prescribed "b" form under the West Bengal Estate Acquisition Act, 1953 and on the 29th May 1972 they also submitted returns in the prescribed form 7a under the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955. Licences under section 405 of the Bengal Municipal Act 1932 have been issued in favour of the original petitioners by the Municipality of Jhalda for holding the said markets on the said land which fall within the area of the said Municipality.
2. BY two notices under section 57 of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 both dated the 19th March 1973 issued in Case No. Hat/1 of 1973 by the Revenue Officer the original petitioners were called upon to produce necessary records being documents relating to the said Hat and market at Jhalda and to submit written particulars of their rights and interest therein for the purpose of preparation of correct records of rights in the Revisional Settlement and preparation of compensation roll in respect of Zamindari and intermediary rights. The original petitioners were directed to produce by themselves or through their agents such records before the Revenue Officer on the 30th March 1973.
Pursuant thereto, the representatives of original petitioners duly appeared before the Assistant Settlement Officer/revenue officer, Jhalda on the 30th March 1973 and produced records and documents in support of their title to the said land including the registered deed of lease.
3. THE representatives of the lessors also appeared in the said proceedings and contended that the said land were originally 'khas land' of the lessors and were being utilized for Hats and markets. Though such land was settled with the original petitioners under the said lease it was not a settlement in the true sense and the lease did not confer the rights and title of an occupancy raiyat on the lessees who got only the limited right to collect tolls and fees. The Assistant Settlement Officer did not accept such contention. He found that the lessees were in actual possession of the said land and had the rights of a settled raiyat. He held further that subsequent to the publication of a Notification under section 4 of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 for the District of Purulia, all the rights of both the lessors and the lessees stood vested in the State of West Bengal free from all incumbrances.
4. PURSUANT thereto, on the 3rd April 1973, the Collector Purulia, the Additional deputy Commissioner, Estates Acquisition, purulia, the Revenue Officer, Jhalda, the assistant Settlement Officer, Jhalda the land Reforms Officer, Purulia, the Junior land Reforms Officer, Jhalda and the District settlement Officer, Purulia along with their agents and Tahsildars, it is alleged, visited the said lands where the Hat was being held and announced by beat of drums that tolls and fees of the said weekly Hat should be paid not to the original petitioners but to the said authorities.
It is alleged that on the 2nd April 1973 an information had been lodged to the Officer-in-Charge, Jhalda Police Station complaining of interference with the possession of the original petitioners in the said land and for initiation of proceedings under section 144 of
