Court upheld the rights of a tenant-turned-purchaser to challenge improper land vesting notices, emphasizing proper legal procedures must be followed by authorities before dispossession.

Mr. Tapas Kumar Sinha Mr. Joyjit Roy Choudhury …..For the petitioner Mr. Pankaj Halder Mr. Subnendu Bhattacharya Mr., Sanatar Panja Mr. Tapas Manna …For the respondent Mr. Ashok Kumar Banerjee Mr. Styajit Talukder Mr. Arindam Chattarjee ….For the KMDA Mr. Jaydeep Kar Mr. Sirsanya Bandhopadhyay Mr. Chandi Charan De Ms. Sonal Sinha Mr. Anirban Sarkar Ms. Shabnam Faroqui …..For the State Writ petitioner challenges order of vesting passed in U.L. case no. 6(1)/1991/v 4 of 1976 by the competent authority. He also challenged a notice dated June 4, 2015 passed by the competent authority, ULC, Kolkata under Section 10 (5) of the Urban Land (ceiling regulation Act), 1976. (shall be referred as “said Act, 1976” hereinafter).

Brief fact of the petitioner is that he was inducted as a tenant in respect of premise no. 21 Chetla Central Road, Calcutta-27 through an agreement between the petitioner and one Paramananda Bose on April 16, 1982. Since then the petitioner was possessing the said premises.

During such possession the said Paramananda Bose intends to sell out the premises to the petitioner with market value of Rs. 50,000/- per Cottah. However, such agreement was not materialized and subsequently a suit was filed by the petitioner which was ended to execution of a sale deed in favour of the petitioner through Additional Sub Registrar, Alipore. By such the entire property was transferred in the name of the petitioner vide a registered deed of sale dated October

1st, 2003 vide deed no. 2908/2003.

It is the contention of the petitioner that while he was in possession, suddenly the competent authority issued the impugned notice on 4^th June, 2015 directing the petitioner that as he has purchased the premises after promulgation of the said Act, 197 the said transferred of land is unlawful under Section 5 (3) of the said Act, 1976.

Petitioner also challenged a notice dated

19.06.2015 issued by Valuation Officer, KIT being the custodian of the vested land.

To understand the issue involved in the instant writ, the factum of vesting required to demonstrate.

Paramananda Bose, Santosh Bose and Sudhir Bose are the co-owner brothers of property being 21, Chetla Central Road, 14, Peary Mohan Roy Road and 12, Peary Mohan Roy Road. Paramananda Bose submitted statement return under Section 6(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 with the authority concerned. The competent authority on the basis of such statement has prepared a final statement under Sub-section 2 of Section 6 of the said Act, 1976. Against the said statement objections were called for and thereby Paramananda Bose has filed objection under Section 8(3) of the said Act, 1976. The competent authority has heard the objections under section 8(4) of the said Act, 1976 and passed a detailed order. By such order, the competent authority has held that an area of 2524.60 square metres is excess to the ceiling limit of Paramananda Bose in respect of the said premises, 21, Chetla Central Road.

Against such order Paramananda Bose went up to this Court by filing a writ petition. Finally, the Writ Court has directed the said Paramananda Bose to approach the appellate forum. Accordingly, the said Paramananda Bose preferred an appeal under Section 33 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 . The appellate authority has modified the order of the competent authority and has ordered that:

“that the appeal is allowed on consideration of merit. The Competent Authority, Calcutta, is directed to prepare final statement on the basis of 651.00 square metres of excess vacant land at premises at 1, Dwarika Nath Ghosh Land, 273.5 square metres of excess vacant land at premises at 66, Jainuddin Mistry Lane, 802, 96 square metres of excess vacant land at premises 21, Chetla Central Road and 343.41 square metres of excess vacant land at premises at 3/1A. Mafar Kundu Road and issue fresh 10(1) notification accordingly and take subsequent steps towards vesting of excess vacant lands in accorda