IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION Appellate Side Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta WPA 21266 of 2018 Smt. Maya Roy & Another Versus The State of West Bengal and Others For the Petitioners : Mr. Debasish Chattopadhayay, Adv.

Mr. Tirthankar Basu, Adv.

Ms. Suman Biswas, Adv.

Heard on : 25.06.2025 Judgment on : 16.07.2025 Ajay Kumar Gupta, J:

1. The Writ Petitioners approached this court praying for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authority concerned especially the respondent no. 2 to pass and/or issue the formal transfer permission order in favour of the co-lessees or their constituted attorney so that the Plot being No. B-14/273, Kalyani, Nadia may be transferred in favour of the writ petitioners in accordance with law and, at the same time, the writ petitioners made a prayer to prohibit the State respondents from taking any adverse step or steps regarding grant of transfer permission and/or regarding execution and registration of the Deed of Transfer in favour of the petitioners on the basis of the deemed permission of transfer as specified in the Lease Deed along with consequential reliefs thereof.

2. It is the specific case of the Petitioners that Smt. Sikha Karmakar and Sri Subal Chandra Roy are lessees of Plot of Land being Plot No. B-14/273, Kalyani, Nadia under the State of West Bengal. The Lease Deed was executed in their favour by the Estate Manager and Ex-Officio, Assistant Secretary, UD Department, Kalyani, Nadia, West Bengal on 2nd December, 1988 on behalf of Governor, West Bengal. The said Lease Deed consists a restrictive clause on the transfer of Leasehold Interest of the lessees. The said restrictive clause runs as follows: -

“x) Not to assign this lease or part with possessions of the demised land or any buildings erected thereon without the previous consent in writing of the Government and in accordance with the provisions hereinafter contained in respect thereof.

Provided that, should at any time hereafter, the Lessee be desirous of assigning this lease or transfer the leasehold interest in the demised premises and the buildings erected thereon, the Lessees, shall give notice of such intention to the Government and shall be entitled to effect such transfer with the approval of the Government, provided further that, should such approval be not refused within two months of the date of receipt of the applications, the consent of Government to such transfer shall be deemed to have been given for such transfer.”

3. The lessees wanted to assign their Leasehold Interest of the said land to the writ petitioners through their constituted attorney holder, namely, Mainak Kundu. Since there is a restrictive clause in the Lease Deed on the transfer, they submitted an application before the Competent Authority through their constituent Attorney, Mainak Kundu seeking permission for transfer of their Leasehold Interest by way of assignment in favour of the writ petitioners for the residuary period of lease on 11.10.2017 enclosing the payment challan and other documents.

4. The said application was submitted on 11.10.2017. The concerned authority did not take any steps to allow the said prayer for transfer. As per the clause 2(x) of the Lease Deed, two months’ time has been expired. Accordingly, the lessees decided to register the Deed of Assignment in favour of the present petitioners. Therefore, a deed of assignment was executed between the lessees and the present petitioners and the same was tendered to the Registering Authority viz. The Additional District Sub-Registrar, Kalyani, Nadia.

5. The Registering Authority, however, refused to register the Deed of Assignment in absence of the permission of the concerned authority for transfer of Leasehold Interest in favour of the transferee though the concerned Authority has no right to refuse for registering the said deed for the reason of absence of permission from the concerned Authority.

6. Actually, the lessees