Miss. S..P. Nivetha And ANR. v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/68/2025 Miss. S. P. Nivetha and another Vs The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others Mr. K. Vijay Kumar ... for the petitioners Mr. Babita Das ... for the respondents February 24, 2025 [SR] Item no.11 1.

Affidavit of service is already on record.

2.

Mr. K.Vijay Kumar, learned counsel appears for the petitioners. Mr. Babita Das, learned advocate appears for the respondents.

3.

On the prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner, pursuant to the leave granted by the Coordinate Bench dated February 10, 2025, the supplementary affidavit filed in Court today is taken on record.

4.

Copy has been served upon the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

5.

The sole grievance of the petitioners is that, despite the title deed being presented by the petitioners in respect of the immoveable property, the respondent no.2 has failed and neglected to register the same, in accordance with law. 6.

The learned counsel for the respondents submits that, the respondent no.2 has received an objection dated January 27, 2025 written by one Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned advocate Annexure P-4 at page 27 to the writ petition which shows that his client Shri Jayadevan S/o R. Vamadevan raised an

objection contending that the title suit is pending before the jurisdictional civil court at Mayabunder filed by R. Vamadevan challenging the mutation held in favour, interi alia, of the petitioners and since the said civil suit is pending, the respondent no.2 has not taken any further steps in the matter. 7.

R. Bamadevan is not impleaded in this writ petition. 8.

Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned advocate appears today representing R. Vamadevan. He submits that the said suit was filed also for partition of the joint property which is the subject property involved in this writ petition.

9.

Be that at it may, the respondent no.2, upon issuing prior hearing notice of at least seven days, to the petitioners and the said R.Vamadevan and also upon Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned advocate and after affording an opportunity of hearing, shall decide the issue by passing a reasoned order, in accordance with law.

10.

The entire exercise shall be carried out and completed by the respondent no.2 within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order and a reasoned order shall be communicated to the petitioners and Mr.R.Vamadevan and Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned advocate representing the said Mr. R. Vamadevan positively within a period of one week from the date of the reasoned order to be passed.

11.

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the rival claims of the parties and the parties shall be at liberty to urge whatever points they wish to urge, by relying upon whatever records and documents and judgments they wish to rely upon before the respondent no.2.

1.

It is made clear that this order shall not create any right or equity in favour of the petitioners or in favour of R. Vamadevan, who shall be attending the hearing before the respondent no.2, if they do not succeed to their respective contentions before the respondent no.2, strictly in accordance with law.

12.

In the event, the reasoned order goes in favour of the petitioners, then, the respondent no.2, shall take all necessary and consequential steps, in accordance with law but positively within a period of two weeks from the date of the said reasoned order to be passed.

13.

It is needless to mention that the petitioners shall be entitled to be represented in the hearing before the respondent no.2 along their duly authorised representative. 14.

Since affidavits are not called for, the allegations made in this writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents.

14. It is once again clarified that R. Vamadevan shall be served with a notice of hearing and shall be granted an opportunity of hearing, as directed above.

15. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition WPA/68/2025 stands disposed of, without any order as to costs.

( Aniruddha Roy, J. )