Sankar Chakraborty And ANR. v. The State Of West Bengal And ORS.
S/L 9 30.07.2025 Court. No. 19 Suvayan WPA 552 of 2025 With CAN 1 of 2025 (application not in the file) Sankar Chakraborty & Anr.
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Partha Pratim Roy Mr. Lakshminath Bhattacharya Mr. Rajib Kumar Acharyya Mr. Banshi Badan Maity ...for the petitioners.
Mr. Lalit Mohan Mahata, AGP Mr. Ziaul Haque ...for the State.
Mr. Supratim Dhar, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Tanwishree Mukherjee ...for the Municipality.
1.
The exception to the report as filed today on behalf of the writ petitioners is taken on record.
2. By filing the instant writ petition the writ petitioners have prayed for issuance of appropriate writ/writs against the respondents/authorities to take appropriate steps in terms of the representation dated 16.12.2024 as submitted by writ petitioners with respondents/authorities a copy of which has been annexed at page nos. 95 to 99 of the instant writ petition.
3. It is pertinent to mention herein that by submitting such representation dated 16.12.2024 the writ petitioners contended that without initiating any appropriate process of acquisition and without disbursing any compensation, respondents/authorities more specifically;
respondent nos. 9 and 10 had initiated a project namely; 'Amrut' in the land of the writ petitioners, particulars of
which has been mentioned in paragraph no. 23 of the instant writ petition.
4. At the time of hearing, Mr. Roy, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners in virtual mode at the very outset draws attention of this Court to the copies of the various deeds of title pursuant to which the writ petitioners claim to become the absolute owners in LR plot nos. 3162 and 3164 in Mouza - Uttar Mechogram under P.S. - Panskura.
5. Drawing attention to page no. 83 of the instant writ petition, it is further submitted by Mr. Roy that after such purchase the names of the writ petitioners were recorded in the LRROR.
6. It is further contended that all on a sudden the writ petitioners noticed that in the aforementioned two plots of land the respondents/authorities have recorded the name of Urban Development and Municipal Affairs (UDMA) department.
7. It is the further case of the writ petitioners that soon thereafter it has come to the knowledge of the writ petitioners that the respondent nos. 9 and 10/authorities have started filling up the aforementioned plots of land of the writ petitioners and made an attempt to implement the 'Amrut' project in such plots of land.
8. It is thus submitted by Mr. Roy that without initiating appropriate process of acquisition under Act XXX of 2013 the respondents/authorities are not entitled to utilize the land of the writ petitioners especially when no
compensation has been awarded in favour of the writ petitioners.
9. Such contention is, however, opposed by Mr. Dhar, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents/authorities.
10. It is argued by Mr. Dhar that from the report as submitted on behalf of respondents/State and its instrumentalities it would reveal that the aforementioned two plots have been vested long back and as on this day no case is pending before any Court of law and/or any authority challenging the vesting proceeding. It is further submitted by Mr. Dhar that the writ petitioners have purchased the subject plots of land without making any searching regarding title.
11. It is further submitted by Mr. Dhar that page no. 17 it would reveal that by a memo dated 05.01.2024 the aforementioned two plots of land along with other contiguous plots have been transferred to the UDMA by the Land and Land Revenue Department, Government of West Bengal for construction of water treatment plant under Amrut 2.0 Project by the Panskura Municipality.
12. On careful consideration of the entire materials as placed before this Court and after hearing the learned Advocates for the contending parties, this Court is fully satisfied that the subject plots of land have already been vested and such vesting took place prior to purchase of the said plots of land by the writ petitioners and thus no right, title and interest passes in favour of the writ petitioners by virtue
of the deed of conveyances as have been annexed to the instant writ petition.
13. This Court thus finds no illegality and/or irregularity in action of respondents/State and its instrumentalities.
14.
In view of the discussion made hereinabove, the instant writ petition being WPA 552 of 2025 is thus dismissed. 15.
With the dismissal of the instant writ petition, CAN 1 of 2025 is also disposed of.
16.
The interim order, if there be any, stands hereby vacated.
17.
However, there will be no order as to costs.
18. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all necessary formalities.
(Partha Sarathi Sen, J.)