IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE

21 13.3.2025 Sc Ct. no.2 WPA 4792 OF 2025 --------------

Bikash Naha & Anr.

Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Amit Kumar Pan Ms. Tanusri Santra.

…. For the Petitioners Mr. Chandi Charan De, AGP Mr. Anirban Sarkar.

…. For the Respondents State Mr. Satyajit Talukdar Mr. Arindom Chatterjee.

…. For the Respondent No.5/KMDA Mr. Amit Kumar Pan, learned advocate appears for the petitioners.

Mr. Chandi Charan De, learned Additional Government Pleader appears for the respondents State.

Mr. Satyajit Talukdar, learned advocate appears for the respondent no.5, KMDA.

The petitioners submit that the land, described in the writ petition in paragraph 2, is an unacquired land of a huge chunk of land wherefrom the State had acquired a portion of it.

The portion of land being the subject-matter in this writ petition admittedly has not been acquired and is a freehold land and not vested with the State in any manner, is admitted by the parties.

The land acquisition proceeding was initiated under the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 (for short Act II) in the year 1968-69. The relevant notice under Sub-Section (1)(a) to Section 4 of the Act II was issued on November 2, 1972, Annexure-

P1 at page 11 to the writ petition.

The parties admit that, the portion of land, which is the subject-matter of this writ petition, was not within the scope of the said notice.

The total chunk of land was 47.25 acre out of which 31.37 acre was acquired and the land in question in this writ petition was not within the said measurement of 31.37 Acre Pursuant to a registered Conveyance dated August

13, 2007, Annexure-P2 at page 12 to the writ petition the petitioners purchased the said land. The vendor was one of the owners and land losers in respect of the said acquired land.

The parties also admit that, all the land losers in respect of the said 31.37 acre of acquired land had received the due compensation and they have accepted it. One of such land losers who accepted compensation was the vendor who sold the subject land in the writ petition in favour of the petitioners.

Mr. Amit Kumar Pan, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that, the land purchased by his clients was measuring about 3 cottah 24 sq.ft. as per the Site Plan and the Schedule appended to the Conveyance.

Learned advocate for the petitioners further submits that, the petitioners intend to develop the land for which the petitioners are bound in law to obtain a sanctioned plan from the jurisdictional municipal corporation. He submits that, the moment petitioners will have to apply for obtaining the sanctioned plan, the petitioners are required to provide the detail of the land including its boundary. Accordingly, the petitioners requested the State acquiring authority to demarcate the acquired portion of the land so that in effect, the petitioners’ land is segregated and properly demarcated to enable the petitioners to apply for obtaining sanctioned plan. The representation dated January 20, 2025 Annexure-P3 at page 24 to the writ petition was submitted before the respondent no.2. The said representation has not yet been considered.

In view of the above, the instant writ petition has been filed with the following reliefs :

(a) A writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to demarcate the acquired area of said Plot No.53 so acquired in connection with the said proceeding bearing Case No.LA-II/27 of 1968-69 to enable the petitioner to develop the said land for his own use and occupation, forthwith;

(b) A writ in the nature of Certiorary calling upon the respondents to produce and/or caused to be produced relating to the case before this Hon’ble Court to do conscionable justice to your petitioners, upon perusing the same;

(c) Rule NISI in terms of prayers (a) and (b)

above;

(d) An order directing the respondents to demarcate the acquired area of said Plot No.53 so acquired in connection with the