Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
OM NARAYAN RAI
Asia Health Care Development Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
OM NARAYAN RAI, J.
1. This writ petition assails the initiation of proceedings under the West Bengal Public Land (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1962 (hereafter “the 1962 Act”) and an order dated July 22, 2025 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Berhampore Sadar, Murshidabad (hereafter “respondent no.5”) by exercising the power vested in the respondent no.5 under Section 3(1) of the 1962 Act.
FACTS OF THE CASE:
2. The relevant facts leading to the institution of the writ petition may be noticed first:-
a. On July 09, 2004 an agreement (hereafter “lease agreement”) was entered into by and between the petitioner and the Murshidabad Zilla Parishad (hereafter the respondent no. 2) for a period of 21 years whereby a Diagnostic cum Medical Centre along with land described in the First Schedule thereof, the plant, machineries, fixtures, fittings and other installations had been let out on monthly rental basis by the respondent no.2 to the petitioner.
b. On March 03, 2005 a supplementary agreement was also executed between the parties whereby certain terms and conditions of the lease agreement were altered and modified.
c. It is the petitioner’s case that upon taking po
: An administrative order passed without jurisdiction is amenable to a writ petition.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the dispute between the petitioners' claim as landholders and the claim of unauthorized occupation by the Estate Officer should be decided by ....
The necessity for eviction must be justified in addition to establishing unauthorized occupation under the Public Premises Act, as reaffirmed by prior judicial interpretations.
The court emphasized the necessity of compliance with statutory provisions and natural justice principles in eviction proceedings, mandating that execution petitions be filed to allow for objections ....
The eviction under the Public Premises Act was upheld as lawful, with sufficient notice and adherence to due process, and claims of bias against the Estate Officer were rejected.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Deputy Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to pass orders for recovery of possession under Regulation 1966, and the recovery of possession wa....
Eviction proceedings under the Public Premises Act cannot resolve bona fide title disputes, which must be adjudicated in a civil court, ensuring respect for legal authority and due process.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
