This writ petition, which was moved as far back on March 22, 1978, was kept pending before this court for about nine years, is being disposed of today, even in the absence of the State Advocate, although an affidavit in opposition has been filed on behalf of the Special Revenue Officer, Grade-II on September 6, 1978, dealing with some factual statements made in the instant writ petition, which I shall deal hereinafter. The facts of this writ petition are not disputed.

2 In the said affidavit-in-opposition no new fact has been stated except the fact which are borne by records of 5A proceeding and the consequent appellate orders and the present reopening proceeding by the Revenue Officer, as such, the said affidavit-in-opposition, in my opinion, has no informative value for the purpose of disposal of this petition.

3. It is the case of the writ petitioners that one Ram Kinkar Roy (since deceased), dedicated certain properties to his ancestral deities, Sri Sri Balaram Jew, Sree Sree Kanal Jew and Sri Sri Narugopal Jew and the income of the said properties were meant to be “exclusively” used for seva-puja of the said deities. The said Ram Kinkar Roy also executed a “Will” on August 4, 1950, corresponding to Sraban 1357 B. S. before his death. The said Will provided that in the event he is not being able to execute. Arpannama, his sons, namely, Ram Prasanna Roy, Radhika Prasanna Roy, Pinaki Ranjan Roy, Arun Kumar Roy and Sitangshu Kumar Roy were directed to execute the same and so on and so forth and be had appointed himself as “the first Shebait” of the said deities Ram Prasanna Roy and his five other brothers in token of reverence of the last desire of their father executed three Arpannamas on July 13, 1954, corresponding to Asar 1361 B.S. in favour of the said three deities dedicating the properties, which were “absolutely debuttar” in nature and registered the said documents on or about August 30, 1954.

4 The said debuttar properties were recorded duly in the names of the deities, in the Revisional Record of Rights, which were finally published in the year 1967. Subsequently, 5A enquiry proceeding was started under the provisions of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953, in Case Nos 1, 2 and 3 of Mouza Sreepur. J.L. No. 103, P.S. Kharba, District Malda, by the Revenue Officer; Chanchal Settlement Camp (Malda), and after examining the witnesses and perusing the documents and Books of Account, the said Revenue Officer on June 17, 1957, found in all the three cases, there were no mala fide intention behind the transfer and accordingly, the properties were “earmarked” as proved and established long before the mischief date, that is, May 5, 1953, though the endowment could not be given legal support, the Revenue Officer came to the definite finding that the transferor and the transferees have been able to prove that the transfers have been made bona fide and not hit by the mischief period.

5. It is further the case of the present writ petitioners that the Revenue Officer, Chanchal Settlement Camp issued notice on January 21, 1965, upon the Shebait of the deities for holding “an enquiry”, under s. 45A of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953, for determining the nature and character of the debuttar as envisaged under s. 6(1)(k) and provisio to s. 17 of the said ACI. and on April 19, 1965, in ail the three cases it has been held that the seva puja of the deities food other religious functions were being carried out in the manner as stipulated in the deed of dedication and the diebuttar properties full fill all the conditions, which are required of a true and “absolute debuttar” and the debuttar was entitled to the “benefits” as envisaged under s. 6(1)(f) of the said Act.

6. By the 3rd week of December 1967, the Revenue Officer, Chanchal Settlement Camp (Malda), however, issued notice under s. 47, 6(1), 5A(3)(ii) of the said Act upon the six sons of the deceased Ram Kinkar Roy, the present writ petitioners, to show cau