A party is estopped from opposing the release of land when it has failed to prefer an appeal against an order directing the demarcation of the land.

Basically the petitioner made this writ petition for the purpose of commanding the respondents to release the excess land measuring 17 Cottahs at 59, Bagmari Road, Calcutta to the petitioner in view of the release order made by the respondents No. 2 herein dated 20.4.98 being Annexure ‘F’ to the writ petition.

2. He also made the prayer to direct the respondents to forbear from making any such development and/or construction work under the development scheme and/or making any such addition, alteration or construction of the said exempted land measuring 17 Cottaht of the said exempted land being 59, Bagmari Road, Calcutta etc.

3. Between late February and early March 1997, Calcutta Improvement Trust being requiring body of the concerned land started negotiating with one M/s. Rashtriya Pariyojona Nirman Nigam Limited for the purpose of construction of Market-cum-Commercial Complex therein. On 5th March, 1997 the first Land Acquisition Collector, Calcutta informed the petitioner with reference to the letter dated 11th October, 1996 that they acquired an area of 6 Bighas 5 Cottahs of land under L.A. Case No. VII-M/106 of 1954 for C.I.T. Scheme No. VII-M (Maniktala Main Road to Ultadanga Main Road). Thereafter no L.A. proceedings has been initiated as yet in respect of the said property by any department of State Government. On 11th March, 1997 Calcutta Improvement Trust issued work order upon the aforesaid contracting party. On 12th March, 1997 the petitioner informed the Chief Valuer of the Calcutta Improvement Trust that Land Acquisition Collector issued a certificate regarding the acquired land of the above subject property with a request to demarcate the balance land which is now remaining outside the scheme and project of C.I.T. The petitioner agreed to pay all requisite fees for the demarcation affairs.

4. On 9th June, 1997 Chief Valuer of the Calcutta Improvement Trust came to the finding that premises No. 59, Bagmari Road, Calcutta had been fully acquired under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by the L.A. Collector, Calcutta and possession of the said premises measuring about 6 Bighas 5 Cottahs had been handed over to C.I.T. as per provisions of L.A. Act, 1894, and no balance land remains in the said premises. Upon demarcation of the balance land of premises No. 59, Bagmari Road, is neither feasible nor plausible.

5. Real crux of the case stands on measurement of the land in excess measuring 17 Cottahs and/or exemption of the same from the acquired land. There is no doubt that a land measuring 6 Bighas 5 Cottahs was acquired in the year 1954 and compensation was paid in respect of such acquisition to the appropriate party. There is no existing dispute to that extent.

6. However dispute as cropped up resulted to an order passed by a Single Bench of this Hon'ble Court in disposing a writ petition being W.P. No. 9456 (W) of 1997 on 10th June, 1997 which speaks as follows :-

“In presence of Mr. Gupta, learned Senior Advocate on behalf of the state-respondents, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction upon the concerned authority to consider the prayer of the writ petitioner for the purpose of demarcation of the land in question in pursuance of his representation dated 12th March, 1977 in accordance with the provisions of law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 8 weeks from the date of communication of this order.”

7. The word ‘concerned authority’ has some significance in the matter and law says ‘concerned authority’ signifies acquiring authority but not the requiring authority.

8. No appeal was preferred from the order by any of the parties. Acquiring authority has acted upon on the basis of such order.

9. No appears from the report of the Second Land Acquisition Collector, Calcutta i.e. being part of acquiring authority dated 20th April, 1998 which that he was made an inspection and ............ that there is land in ......... amounting to an area of 17 Cottahs and 5 Chittaks in a ......... at the e