V.Pandi Selvi v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] ** WPA/151/2021 V. Pandi Selvi

...Petitioner

Vs.

The Andaman and Nicobar Administration And others ... Respondents Mr. V. D. Sivabalan, Advocate ... for the petitioner Mr. A. K. Mandal, Advocate ... for the Administration Mr. Lokesh Chezian, Advocate ... for the respondent no.5 September 15, 2021 [SR] Item No.2 The writ petitioner is seeking direction upon the respondent No.3 to conclude the RC Case No.495/TPB/2019 pending before the Office of the Tehsildar, Pot Blair within a stipulated period of time i.e. to say, within one month from the date of the order.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the private respondent and so also Mr. Mandal, learned advocate appearing for the Administration.

The background facts leading to this writ petition is that the petitioner is a recorded owner of the landed property bearing survey no. 259/2/1, 259/2/2, 259/2/3, 259/2/4, 259/2/10 and 259/2/11 jointly recorded in favour of the petitioner and three others. The petitioner filed an application for demarcation of landed property on the basis of the application vide RD No. 3412 in respect of the land bearing survey no. 259/6/1/1 measuring of 0.2000 hectares, 259/12/A/P measuring an area of 0.2900 hectares, survey no. 259/12 (B) measuring an area of 0.60 hectares and survey no. 259/14 measuring an area of 0.2500 hectares situated at Prothrapur village.

According to the petitioner, the respondent no. 5 admitted that he has encroached an area of 2420 sq.mtrs out of the recorded land and was in possession for more than two years, whereas the fact remains that till 2018 there was no dispute after the subdivision of the land during the year 2018.

That apart, private respondent has no document to substantiate his case that he has been in the possession of the subject land more than two years. In such circumstances the petitioner claims that the respondent has to vacate the alleged unauthorized encroachment measuring an area of 2420 sq. mtrs. in terms of the Andaman and Nicobar Island Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulations. 1966.

Revealing the above facts, the petitioner submitted written submission before the respondent authority in the said R.C. proceeding. The order sheet dated 18.02.2019 reflects that on an application from the writ petitioner regarding the demarcation of the land bearing Sy.No.259/2/1 area 0.0621 hectares situated at Prothrapur Village, the revenue case was registered and the report from the Patwari Circle 12 (B) was called for, which revealed that the said land stands recorded in favour of the present writ petitioner. The proceeding in the R.C. Case was deferred from time to time and is pending since long. The report of the Surveyor dated 03.01.2020 reflects that the demarcation was carried in presence of the recorded tenant and the side plot holders and after demarcation, the finding was that an area of 2420 sq.mtrs is illegally acquired by Shri A.Ouseph from the land bearing No. Sy.No.259/2/1. In the said proceeding, petitioner was directed to submit a written submission by 21.09.2020.

In my view there is no provision for relegating the proceeding to a suit court. If the private respondent thinks that his title and possession is rather clouded, then, he has option to file suit for declaration of his title and possession to dispel the cloud.

Learned advocate for the private respondent made a request to the authority that the matter be referred to Civil Court for adjudication of the dispute.

It appears that the said proceeding under reference is pending since long, hence it is expedient on the part of the respondent no.3 authority to conclude the proceeding by a speaking order within six weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

On submission of Mr. Mandal on behalf of the Administration and so also the counsel for the private respondent since the affidavit-in-

opposition has not been used, the averments made in the writ application be treated as denied and disputed.

Thus, the writ application being WPA/151/2021 is disposed of. No order as to costs.

The parties are directed to act on the server copy of the order downloaded from the official website.

( Shivakant Prasad, J. )