The rights of the present writ petitioners to develop their property were upheld, and the court clarified that the land acquisition proceedings did not affect their rights.

JUDGMENT :

PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.:

1. The writ petitioners and the respondents are represented by their respective learned Advocates.

2. The affidavit-in-opposition as filed on behalf of the respondents today is taken on record.

3. This Court has heard Mr. Banerjee, learned Senior Advocate on behalf of the writ petitioners at length and Mr. Gupta, learned Advocate for the respondents. The present case is now taken up for passing appropriate order.

4. By filing the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the writ petitioners have prayed for setting aside the impugned reasoned order dated 24.11.2020 as passed by the Chairman of the respondent No. 1 with a further prayer for issuance of writ of mandamus commanding and/or directing the respondent No. 1/authority and its officials to grant no objection in favour of the petitioners for development of the property of the writ petitioner which is the subject matter of the instant writ petition.

5. In support of the instant writ petition, Mr. Banerjee, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the writ petitioners contended before this Court that under a compelling circumstances in a third round of litigation the present writ petitioners have to approach before this Court for obtaining appropriate relief in view of the fact that the present writ petitioners, more specifically; the writ petitioner No. 2 being the owner of a portion of plot No. 5967 has prayed for no objection for development of his plot of land before the respondent No. 1 which was declined by the respondent No. 1/authority and/or its chairman and/or its officials under cover of its reasoned order dated 24.11.2020.

6. In course of his submission Mr. Banerjee, learned Senior Advocate for the writ petitioners at the very outset draws attention of this Court to page No. 22 of the writ petition being Annexure-P4. It is contended that from the photocopy of the said document, it would reveal that writ petitioners purchased a plot of land in plot No. 5967 having an area of 0.1000 acre which was previously a ‘sali’ land and which has been subsequently converted to a ‘bastu’ land by the BL&LRO on the basis of their application for conversion. It is further contended that immediately after allowing of such conversion, the writ petitioners approached the respondents/authorities for granting no objection so as to enable the present writ petitioners for further development of the land of the writ petitioners at plot No. 5967. However, such request was no considered favourably which is why the writ petitioners were compelled to approach the Hon’ble Court by filing a separate writ petition from which an appeal was preferred before the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court being MAT No. 579 of 2020 where the Hon’ble Division Bench vide its order dated 14.10.2020 directed the respondents/authorities to hear out and to dispose of the prayer of the present writ petitioners in accordance with law.

7. In course of hearing, Mr. Banerjee further draws attention of this Court to page No. 39 being Annexure – P7. It is argued that from the said Annexure – P7 it would reveal that in WP 21509 (W) of 2000 a co-ordinate Bench of this Court by its order dated 02.05.2001 directed for maintaining status quo in respect of a portion of land in plot No. 5967 and such status quo though is still prevailing but the said order does not cover the entire plot of land and further the present writ petitioners are not the parties to the said writ petition. It is thus argued by Mr. Banerjee, learned Senior Advocate on behalf of the writ petitioners that the respondents/authorities are at fault in not considering the representation of the present writ petitioners favourably on the basis of the said order of status quo which according to Mr. Banerjee is not justifiable in the eye of law.

8. In course of his submission Mr. Banerjee further submits that on the basis of a RTI application the respondents/authorities under cover of its letter dated 04.12.20