IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
M.V. MURALIDARAN, J.
Barendra Nath Sahoo – Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.A. No. 24950 of 2018
Decided on : 03-04-2024
Encroachment - Land Dispute - West Bengal Highways Act, 1964 - Section 10(1), Section 10(2), Section 10(3), Section 10(4) - The judgment discusses the encroachment over PWD land in Dag No.175, J.L.No.38, Khatian No.515 of Mouza-Ilan, and the legal proceedings under the West Bengal Highways Act, 1964. The court upheld the orders of the Sub Divisional Magistrate and District Magistrate, concluding that no encroachment existed and removal of encroachment was not required.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition to quash impugned orders and direct removal of encroachment over PWD land in Dag No.175, J.L.No.38, Khatian No.515 of Mouza-Ilan. The petitioner claimed ownership of the land and alleged illegal encroachment and construction by the private respondents. The respondent authorities had initiated proceedings for construction of Egra Ramnagar Road, and some parts of the petitioner's land were acquired. The petitioner sought removal of the encroachment, but the authorities and courts found no evidence of encroachment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's claims of encroachment were not supported by evidence. The Sub Divisional Magistrate and District Magistrate, after joint inspections and verification, concluded that no encroachment existed and removal of encroachment was not required. The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the orders of the lower authorities.
Issues: The main issue was the alleged encroachment over PWD land by the private respondents. The petitioner sought removal of the encroachment, while the respondents contested the claims of encroachment. The court also considered the legality of the orders passed by the lower authorities.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of evidence supporting the petitioner's claims of encroachment. The court upheld the orders of the Sub Divisional Magistrate and District Magistrate, emphasizing the absence of encroachment and the legal proceedings under the West Bengal Highways Act, 1964.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, finding no merit in the petitioner's claims and upholding the orders of the lower authorities. The court concluded that removal of encroachment was not required and upheld the decisions of the Sub Divisional Magistrate and District Magistrate.
JUDGMENT :
M.V. Muralidaran, J.
Heard Mr.K.C.Das, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Suman Sengupta, learned Government counsel for the respondents 1 to 8 and Mr.Atarup Banerjee, learned counsel for the respondents 9 to 11.
2. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to quash the impugned orders dated 4.10.2018 and 1.11.2018 passed by the District Magistrate, Purba Medinipur and to direct the respondents to remove the encroachment over the PWD land in Dag No.175, J.L.No.38, Khatian No.515 of Mouza-Ilan, Police Station – Egra and also to direct the private respondents to stop construction over the land in question.
3. The case of the petitioner is as follows:
The petitioner is owning and possessing the plot of land admeasuring about 14 decimal at Dag No.175, J.L.No.38, Khatian No.515 of Mouza-Ilan, which is situated besides the Egra to Digha Roads via Kudi. The parts of the plots land being Plot No.175 were acquired and, in this regard, respective plan was issued by the competent authority. There is an encroachment and construction over the PWD land of Dag No.175, which is situated besides the Egra to Digha Roads, which is used by the petitioner as ingress and egress as well as the general public at large. While so, the private respondents 9 to 11 without taking any permission from the authority have illegally made an encroachment and started construction over the said PWD land of Dag No.175.
3.1. The petitioner intimated to the Assistant Engineer, Contai Sub Division, Highway, PWD (Roads) Directorate, Purba Medinipur that the private respondents have obstructed the PWD land. However, the Assistant Engineer did not take steps for removal of the encroachment. The encroachment made by the private respondents was also brought to the notice of the respondent authorities, but no steps have been taken to remove the unauthorized obstruction on the PWD land. If the private respondents are allowed to continue to obstruct the land in question, the petitioner, including the other people will suffer immense loss.
3.2. Aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in not taking steps to remove the obstruction, the petitioner has filed W.P.No.21129(W) of 2017. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court under the order dated 14.9.2017. Thereafter, the Assistant Engineer has issued notice under Section 10(1) of the West Bengal Highways Act to the respondents 9 to 11 directing them to remove the structure and/or obstruction on or before 21.9.2017.
3.3. Since the respondents 9 to 11 did not remove the encroachments, the Assistant Engineer has made an application under Section 10(2) of the Act before the Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate at Egra for removal of the unauthorized encroachment in front of Dag No.175. Pursuant to the said notice, the Sub Divisional Magistrate issued hearing notice to the private respondents to appear on 8.11.2017. On the same day, the Sub Divisional Magistrate has passed an order based on the report submitted by the Spl. LAO that the opposite parties have not encroached the public land.
3.4. Aggrieved by the order dated 8.11.2017, the petitioner has filed an appeal before the District Magistrate. The District Magistrate, vide order dated 29.5.2018, observing that since the LA plan is considered as evidence in respect of any land acquisition and the land mentioned in the appeal was acquired by the State, the PWD (Roads) Department to file a separate petition to the Sub Divisional Magistrate on the basis of the LA plan for getting an order for removal of encroachment over the public land and also ordered joint inspection for measurement of the exact area of land that belongs to the PWD (Roads) Department. Pursuant to the order dated 29.5.2018, joint inspection over the suit plot was conducted.
3.5. Aggrieved by the order dated 29.5.2018, the private respondents have filed W.P.No.11495(W) of 2018. By the order dated 24.7.2018, the said writ petition was disposed of. On 4.10.2018, the
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of substantial evidence to support claims of encroachment. The judgment emphasizes the importance of legal proceedings under the We....
encroachment of Land - photographs cannot give clear picture about the fact that whether road has been encroached upon or not and to what extent it is encroached upon and the same is encroached upon ....
The Magistrate must follow the mandatory procedure under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which requires the Magistrate to first question the person against whom the order is made wheth....
A member of a Gram Panchayat can be disqualified for encroaching on government land under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, and such disqualification is valid if supported....
Eviction orders under the U.P. Revenue Code require measurement and demarcation to establish illegal possession; failure to do so renders such orders unsustainable.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to conduct a survey to identify encroachments on public lands and to take appropriate action for their removal under the relevant laws.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.