Madhusudan Ghosh And ORS v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

06.05.2025 Item No.18 Ct. No.26 CHC R.V.W. 54 of 2024 Madhusudan Ghosh & Ors.

Vs.

State of West Bengal & Ors.

in MAT 309 of 2015 Madhusudan Ghosh & Ors.

Vs.

State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Krishnendu Banerjee, Advocate Mr. Sourav Chatterjee, Advocate ...for the review applicants

1. Review applicants seek review of the order dated December 14, 2023 passed in MAT 309 of 2015.

2. Learned advocate appearing for the review applicants submits that, two plots of land were subsequently renumbered in three plots of land. He draws the attention of the Court to the second paragraph of page 2 of the impugned order which records the new numbers.

3. Learned advocate appearing for the review applicants submits that, the original order of the department was partially in favour of the review applicants and that, the same should be restored.

4. Review application is coming for the first time before the Court. Without directing service, we decided to consider the materials of the review applicants so as to assess whether or not the respondents are required to be notified.

5. As noted above, the first contention of the review applicants is belied from the records made available to Court. Plot nos EP. 319 and 324/3 were subsequently renumbered as SP 923, 548 and 526 on September 12, 1988. There is no error in such recording with regard thereto in our order dated December 14, 2023. So far as the original order of the department being partially in favour of the review applicants is concerned, we considered the merits of the case and found at the time of the order under review that, original allottees in respect of immovable properties were sought to be replaced by other persons without the process known to law. In such circumstances, we set aside both the original order of the department as also the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. We clarified that, we did not decide the right, title and interest inter se between the private parties in the proceedings. Same situation continues today.

6. According to us, there exists no ground for review.

7. R.V.W. 54 of 2024 is dismissed without any order as to costs.

(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)