Sukumar Guria v. Union Of India And ORS.

January 05, 2023 ARDR (9) WPA 8873 of 2022 Sukumar Guria Vs.

The Union of India & Ors.

Adv. Manish Kumar Das, Adv. Ziaul Haque, Adv. Himarri Mahato, ...for the petitioner.

Adv. Dibashis Basu, Adv. Arun Bandopadhyay, ...for the respondent nos. 9 to 11.

Adv. Ansar Mondal, Adv. Srilekha Bhattacharyya, ...for the State.

Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken on record.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the land of the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of laying railway track in Deshpran-Nandigram project. No compensation was paid to the petitioner for the same. The petitioner seeks liberty to submit a comprehensive representation ventilating his grievance before the 6th respondent and prays for a direction upon the respondent to consider the representation at the earliest. It is submitted on behalf of the State respondents that the compensation has already been paid to the grandfather of the petitioner during his lifetime. Be that as it may, since the petitioner intends to submit a comprehensive representation before the concerned authority, the writ petition being WPA 8873 of

2022 is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to submit such representation before the 6th respondent within seven days from date. The 6th respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the representation within one month from the date of receipt thereof upon affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to all the interested persons including the petitioner, in accordance with law. The decision taken by the authority shall be communicated to the petitioner within a week thereof. Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the petition are deemed not to be admitted. There shall however, be no order as to costs. Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties upon compliance of necessary formalities.

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)