Kartick Chandra Pakira v. State Of West Bengal & ORS

26.07.2021 Ct. No. 10 W.P.A. 1679 of 2019 (VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE) rc/SB KARTICK CHANDRA PAKIRA Vs.

THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

Mr. Kajal Roy ..for the Petitioner Mr. Ram Chandra Ghuchait .. for the State The grievance of the petitioner is for correction of land records It is submitted by the Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the matter pertaining to correction of land records is pending before the Additional District Magistrate (L.R.) and the District Land and Land Reforms Officer, Hooghly being the respondent no. 2 herein. It is further submitted that the proceeding has been pending since 2009 and the respondent no. 5 has been unable to dispose of the proceeding notwithstanding an order dated 14.02.2017 passed by the Collector in its appeallate jurisdiction.

The State is represented.

It is submitted by the Advocate appearing on behalf of the State-respondent that the petitioner has an adequate efficacious alternative statutory remedy in view of the provisions of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act and thus this petition is not

maintainable.

I am of the view that even though the petitioner has a statutory alternative remedy, in the peculiar facts of the instant case, I choose to exercise my discretionary power in entertaining this writ petition on the ground that there can be no earthly reason as to why any litigant should be asked to wait for more than a decade for resolution of his grievances. I also find that there is nothing on record to show that since the Collector had disposed of the connected appeal on 14.02.2017, the respondent no. 2 has taken any steps in the matter.

In view of the fact that the matter has been pending for more than a decade, I direct the respondent no. 2 to hear and dispose of the subject proceeding pending before him within a period of twelve weeks from date after giving right of hearing to all the parties and in accordance with law.

I make it clear that I have not entered into the merits of this case and the respondent no. 2 will not be influenced by any observation on the merits of the case. All questions are left open to be decided by the respondent no. 2 in accordance with law.

It is expected that the entire exercise will be completed by the respondent no. 2 within the aforesaid stipulated time period from the date of communication of this order.

With the above

observations and directions, this writ petition being WP 1679 of 2019 is disposed of.

(Ravi Krishan Kapur, J.)