IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE PRESENT:

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE RAVI KRISHAN KAPUR WPA 18275 of 2004 With IA No. CAN 2 of 2017 M/S Trigun Prasad Singh & Sons & Ors.

-Vs-

Union of India & Ors.

With WPA 9690 of 2006 M/S Trigun Prasad Singh & Sons & Ors.

-Vs-

Chairman, Railway Board, Railway Bhawan For the petitioners : Mr. Sandipto Bose Mr. Achinta Sarkar For the respondents : Mr. Sanajit Kumar Ghosh Judgment on : 16.05.2025 Ravi Krishan Kapur, J.

1. By consent of the parties, both these writ petition i.e. WPA 18275 0f 2004 and WPA 9690 of 2006 were heard analogously.

2. All the petitioners are inter-alia engaged in the trading of stone chips, coal coke and fire wood and operate from licensed plots at Woodgola Sealdah, Railway Siding and Coal Depot Sealdah Sidings.

3. Briefly, the petitioners were allotted separate licences for plots of land belonging to the Railways initially for a period of 40 years and the same were renewed in 1985 for a period of one year only. Pursuant to the above, the petitioners had paid the licence fees in respect of their respective licenses till the year 1985-86. In or about 1983-84, the respondent Railways requested the Land Acquisition Collector to assess the value of such plots and to fix the valuation of the same. Subsequently, the valuation was enhanced @ 10%. The enhancement was challenged by the plot holders in a prior writ petition C.R. No.4058 (W) of 1986 before this Court. By a judgment dated 5 September 1988, the writ petition was disposed of by directing the respondent Railways, to inter-alia act in accordance with law and a Survey Committee was appointed and directed to file a Report in this regard.

4. By a demand notice no. GL_165A/DEMAND NOTICE/ REVISED RATE/04 dated 16-17/8/2004, the respondent no.4, Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, Sealdah inter alia directed the petitioners to make payments of arrear licence fees and also terminated the licences in their favour and further demanded that the petitioners vacate their respective plots at Sealdah Railway Sidings. Subsequently, in an another writ petition being WP 9690 of 2006, the writ petitioners challenged the notices dated 8 December 2005 and 24 February 2006 respectively seeking arrear license fees including outstanding municipal taxes.

5. It is alleged by the petitioners that the impugned notices dated 16-17 August 2004, 8 December 2005 and 24 February 2006 have been issued in violation of the orders of Court passed in the earlier proceedings. It is further alleged that in issuing the impugned demands, the respondent Railway Board has acted contrary to their Guidelines. The respondent Railways have arbitrarily carried out the entire exercise of fixing the land value without disclosing the basis thereof. It is contended that, the Railways were not entitled to raise retrospective demands for licence fees and were bound to follow the directions of the Court as laid down in Divisional Railway Manager, Eastern Railway, Sealdah vs Kalighat Plot Holders Association & Anr (2006) 4 CHN 771. In any event, any proposed enhancement of the license fee could only be prospective and not retrospective.

6. On behalf of the respondents, it is contended that the licences granted to the petitioners were almost 40 years ago and were purely on temporary basis. Admittedly, the same was last renewed in 1985-86 for a period of one year. WPA 9690 of 2006 has been filed by the same proprietorship and partnership firms who had filed the earlier proceedings in respect of the same licensed plots of land. Most of the licence holders who had been granted the original licence by the Railway Board, have either died or have illegally transferred their respective licensed plots in favour of third parties details whereof are unknown to the respondent Railways. The petitioners are also in violation of the terms and conditions of the letter of allotment dated 30 September, 1985. The petitioners had last paid their license fees as far