John Wesley v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...

WPA/76/2020 John Wesley ... Petitioner Vs.

The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and Others ... Respondents Mr. K. Vijay Kumar ... for the petitioner Ms. Anjili Nag ... for the respondent Nos.2&3 Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty Mr. Ramendu Agarwal ... for the Administration December 22, 2022 [SR] Item No.4 The petitioner responded to a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) for cutting a dangerous trees issued by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, South Andaman. The order was passed under section 133 of the Cr.P.C dated 24th September, 2018. Pursuant thereto, the Andaman Public Works Department (APWD) issued a NIT for cutting of the trees in question on the basis of the land in question is a revenue land. The petitioner was a successful tenderer and completed the job. The compensation for the removal of the trees itself for being sold and exploited by the writ petitioner.

Disputes subsequently cropped up. The payment for the work-done by the petitioner has claimed by him remained outstanding since the dispute between the Forest Department, the Revenue Department and the APWD as to whether the land in question remained with the Forest Department and their concurrence is necessary for removing the tree.

Be that as it may, the fact remains that the petitioner had completed his job.

The petitioner has represented before the Division Forest Officer and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests for issuance of a permit for removal of the fallen trees but the same was not responded to.

Ms. Anjili Nag, learned counsel for the Forest Department submits that the land in question is "heritage land" and the trees in question could not have been cut without concurrence and consent of the Forest Department. The directions of the Supreme Court in this regard have been placed.

In the above circumstances, the petitioner may make a comprehensive representation to the APWD who shall dispose of the same and also consider the prayer for refund of security deposit of Rs.13,10,500/- mandatorily and positively within two months from date. The petitioner may apply for appropriate compensation for the work-done, in accordance with law.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

( Rajasekhar Mantha, J. )