An order passed by a Tribunal constituted under Section 55(2) of the West Bengal Estate Acquisition Act, 1953 is amenable to be challenged before the Land Tribunal constituted under the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal Act, 1997.

JUDGMENT

Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.

1. The instant first appeal has been preferred challenging the judgment and order dated 2nd March, 2020 passed by the learned District Judge, Purba Medinipur in the Estate Acquisition Appeal No. 2 of 2012. The subject matter of challenge in the said Estate Acquisition Appeal was an order dated 11th May, 1960 passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer in a proceeding under Section 44(2a) of the West Bengal Estate Acquisition Act, 1953 (in short, 1953 Act). As we have invited the learned advocate appearing for the appellant to advance his argument on the merits of the appeal, the delay in preferring the appeal is condoned and the application being CAN 2 of 2020 is disposed of.

2. The learned District Judge deciding the Estate Acquisition Appeal was acting as a Tribunal under section 44 (3) being appointed by the State Government under Section 55 (2) of the 1953 Act vide notification Dated 27th March, 2012.

3. The issue which arises for consideration is as to whether the present appeal is maintainable before this Court in as much as the Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Land Tribunal) established under the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal Act, 1997 (in short, the 1997 Act) would be having jurisdiction under Section 6 of the 1997 Act to decide the appeal since the order impugned in the appeal is an order passed by an authority as defined in the 1997 Act.

4. According to Mr. Mukherjee, the learned advocate appearing for the appellant, the Tribunal constituted under section 55 (2) of the 1953 Act is not an authority for the purposes of the 1953 Act, as would be explicit from the provisions of section 53 of the 1953 Act and as such the order passed by the Tribunal is not an order passed by an authority under a specified act, as defined under section 2(r) of the 1997 Act.

5. He argues that the learned District Judge is not a persona designata but is a Court to whom power of adjudication has been entrusted under the 1953 Act. The Tribunal is thus a judicial authority adjudicating the rights of the parties and its order is not amenable to the jurisdiction of the Land Tribunal constituted under 1997 Act.

6. He submits that the legislature has consciously omitted an order passed by the Tribunal constituted under section 55 (2) of the 1953 Act from the provisions of Section 6 of the 1997 Act. The obvious intention of the legislature was to confer judicial power of adjudication upon the said Tribunal. The judicial powers thus conferred upon the said Tribunal cannot be subject to a further scrutiny by a Land Tribunal constituted under the 1997 Act.

7. He argues that Mines Tribunal constituted under Section 36 of the 1953 Act is also not an authority under Section 53 of the 1953 Act and as such an order passed by the said Tribunal has been specifically brought under the purview of Section 6 of the 1997 Act. Had it been the intent of the legislature to bring an order passed by a Tribunal constituted under the 1953 Act under the purview of the 1997 Act, such an order would have been certainly incorporated in Section 6 of the 1997 Act.

8. Mr. Ray learned Government Pleader appearing for the State respondents, assisted by Mr. Mitra, learned advocate argues that prior to amendment of Section 6 (a) of the 1997 Act, the said sub section read as ‘an order in original by an authority under a specified Act’ and as such in Section 6(c) order passed by the Mines Tribunal was included since such order was not ‘an order in original’. However, the said provision is now otiose in view the amendment of Section 6 (a) which now reads as ‘any order made by an authority under a specified Act’.

9. He submits that the 1997 Act is a piece of legislation post the 1953 Act and the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 (in short, 1955 Act). Section 3 of the 1997 Act inter alia provides that the provisions of the said Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law for the time being in