##PAGE1##

Court No. 19 WPA 1375 of 2026

(265719)

28.01.2026 Subir Mondal & Ors.

(AD 8-9) Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

(S. Banerjee)

with

WPA 1376 of 2026

Mr. Partha Pratim Roy

Mr. Sarbananda Sanyal

Mr. Samrat Chakraborty

Mr. Saikat Gayen

…for the petitioners

Mr. Shantanu Mitra

Mr. Subhabrata Das

…for the State

(in WPA 1375 of 2026)

Ms. Jhuma Chakraborty

Ms. Rajyashree Mukherjee

…for the State

(in WPA 1376 of 2026)

Affidavit of service filed in Court today, is taken

on record.

The undisputed fact of this case is that the

property of the petitioners was requisitioned in the

year 1963 under the provisions of West Bengal Land

(Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 (‘the 1948

Act’, for short). Possession of the land in question was

taken over and made over to the requiring body, i.e.,

the Public Works (Roads) Department on July 2,

1968. Notification under Section 4(1)(a) of the 1948

2

Act was issued on August 2, 1983 and the same was

published in the Calcutta Gazette (Extraordinary) on

August 10, 1983. No material has been produced

before this Court to show that the Award was

published within the time limit specified under

Section 7A of the 1948 Act. Pursuant to an order

passed by a coordinate Bench in WPA 19619 of 2023

and 19626 of 2023, the Special Land Acquisition

Officer, Purba Bardhaman passed an order dated

August 8, 2025 which is under challenge in these writ

petitions. By the said order the Executive Engineer

was informed to place the award/compensation

amount determined and calculated as per amended

provision of sub-section 1A of Section 23 of Act I of

1894 in respect of the suit plots and land along with

admissible interest/other dues so as to enable the

Competent Authority to disburse the

award/compensation money to the petitioners at the

earliest.

Mr. Roy, learned advocate appearing for the

petitioner submits that the compensation amount

cannot be determined under Act I of 1894 at the

present moment in respect of the plots in question as

in the meantime the 1894 Act stood repealed with the

coming into force of the Right to Fair Compensation

and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation

3

and Resettlement Act, 2013 which came into force on

and from January 1, 2014. It is not in dispute that

the plots in question have been utilised for the

purpose for which it was initially requisitioned but

subsequently followed by issuance of a notice under

Section 4(1)(a) of the 1948 Act.

The question that arises for consideration is

how the compensation amount is to be determined.

Faced with such situation learned advocates

appearing for the State in the aforesaid writ petitions

prayed for an accommodation to assist this Court on

the next occasion.

As prayed for by the learned advocate

representing the State, list this matter on February

12, 2026 under the heading ‘For orders’.

(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)