Sk. Hasibul Hossain And ORS. v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

11.06.2025 Item No.16 Ct. No.26 CHC (disposed of) WPLRT 87 of 2025 Sk. Hasibul Hossain & Ors.

Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Rabindranath Mahato, Advocate Mr. Aritra Shankar Ray, Advocate ...for the petitioners Mr. Dipanjan Datta, Ld. Sr. Govt. Advocate Mr. Subhajit Chowdhury, Advocate ...for the State Mr. Pinaki Dhole, Advocate Ms. Nilofar Begum, Advocate Mr. Rabindra Kumar Pathak, Advocate Ms. Arijita Mandal, Advocate ...for the respondent nos.4 to 8

1. Writ petition is directed against an order dated March 18, 2025 passed in O.A. No. 287 of 2025 (LRTT) by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal.

2. Learned advocate appearing for the writ petitioners submits that, learned Tribunal did not consider the prayer for interim relief as made in the Original Application. He submits that, writ petitioners are aggrieved by the refusal to consider the prayer for interim relief, by the learned Tribunal.

3. Learned advocate appearing for the writ petitioners submits that, the writ petitioners are the owners of the immovable property concerned. He submits that, writ petitioners applied for mutation which was allowed by the concerned Block Land and Land

Reforms Officer.

On appeal by the private respondents, the Appellate Authority was pleased to set aside the order of the concerned Block Land and Land Reforms Officer and restored the record of rights in its original form. He submits that, writ petitioners are entitled to stay of operation of the order passed by the Appellate Authority as an interim measure.

4. State and the private respondents are represented.

5. Learned advocate appearing for the private respondents submits that, there is a Civil Suit pending between the parties. He submits that, initially, there was an order of ad interim injunction which was subsequently vacated. Nonetheless, the Civil Suit is still pending.

6. It appears that, there are title disputes between the private parties with regard to property concerned and that, such disputes are subject-matter of a Title Suit pending before the Civil Court. Apparently, the Appellate Authority doubted the veracity of the title deed of the writ petitioners.

7. In course of hearing of the writ petition, learned advocate for the private parties agree that their respective clients will not create any third party right, title and interest in respect of the immovable property concerned or change the status of the recording in the record of rights, again, in respect of

the immovable property concerned, till the disposal of the pending Title Suit.

8. In such view, no further order need be passed excepting recording the agreement as noted above.

9. W.P.L.R.T. 87 of 2025 is disposed of without any order as to costs.

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