Transfers of land allotments require prior state consent; absence of such consent invalidates claims to lease execution.

Mr. Bellal Sheikh, Advocate Mr. Protim Chakraborty, Advocate Ms. Raima Ganguly, Advocate Heard on : 01.07.2025 Judgment on : 01.07.2025 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.:-

1. Appeal is at the behest of the writ petitioners and directed against the judgment and order dated August 7, 2024 passed in W.P.A. 14092 of

2015.

2. By the impugned judgment and order, learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. Learned Single Judge did not accede to the prayer of the writ petitioners to direct the State authorities to execute a lease deed in respect of a plot of land lying and situate at Kalyani, West Bengal, on the ground that, the transfer of allotment by the allottee in favour of the writ petitioners was without any prior permission of the State.

3. Learned advocate appearing for the appellants submits that, the allotment of a plot of land at Kalyani was made by a writing dated August 1, 1990. He refers to such document in this regard including various clauses therein. He submits that, the lease deed was required to be executed which ultimately was not done. He also refers to the clause which prohibits transfer without the written permission of the State Government.

4. Learned advocate appearing for the appellants, submits that, possession of the land in question was given to the original allottee as will appear from a writing dated March 16, 1994. Thereafter, the original allottee prayed for execution of a lease deed by a writing dated June 6, 2011 which was not acted upon.

5. Learned advocate appearing for the writ petitioners submits that, the original allottee applied for allotment which was not responded to by the State. Thereafter, the original allottee executed an indenture of transfer in favour of the appellants on October 22, 2001.

6. Learned advocate appearing for the appellants submits that, the appellants applied for transfer mutation in respect of the plot concerned which was rejected by a writing dated June 6, 2011 by the authorities.

7. Learned advocate appearing for the appellants relies upon two notifications dated July 12, 2005 and March 7, 2024 on the subject, issued by the State Government. He submits that, by reason of the notification dated July 12, 2005, State Government withdrew restrictions in terms of compulsory minimum period of holding of intending purchaser. He draws the attention of the Court to the guiding principle relating regularization of allotment of land as enanciated by a notification dated March 7, 2024. He submits that, State Government conceived of situations where, there is a transfer of the allotment the same can be regularized subject, however, to fulfillment of the conditions laid down therein.

8. Learned advocate appearing for the appellants relies upon an unreported decision of the coordinate Bench dated January 16, 2014 passed in FMA 3766 of 2013 (State of West Bengal & Anr. Versus Sandhya Rani Das & Anr.) as well as the order dated March 25, 2022 passed in MAT 967 of 2018 (Smt. Mira Sarkar versus The State of West Bengal & Anr.) in support of the contention that, transfer of allotment can be regularized and in fact was directed to be regularized.

9. Learned advocate appearing for the State draws the attention of the Court to the fact that, allotment in favour of the original allottee did not mature into a deed of lease. No deed of lease was executed between the State Government and the original allottee. Moreover,