Smti.Probhine Paroi v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/97/2025 Smt Probhine Paroi Vs The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others Ms. G. Mini ... for the petitioner Mr. Babita Das ... for the respondents February 24, 2025 [SR] Item no.6 1.

Affidavit of service filed in Court is taken on record. 2.

Ms. G. Mini, learned advocate appears for the petitioner. Mr. Babita Das, learned advocate appears for the respondents. 3.

The sole grievance of the petitioner is that the revenue record relating to the land of the petitioner requires an immediate correction of the name of the petitioner. 4.

An application has been submitted under Regulation 87 of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulation, 1966.

5.

The representation is available at Annexure P-2 at Page 18 to the writ petition.

6.

Hearing notice was issued on October 18, 2024 fixing the hearing on November 12, 2024 before the respondent no.2 and the hearing took place on that day but thereafter no further steps.

7.

In view of the above, the respondent no.2 is directed to verify the records and then if any formality is left out or any documents or records are required to be produced further by the petitioner, the same shall be intimated to the petitioner

positively within a period of two weeks from the date of communication of this order.

8.

In the event, the respondent no.2 is satisfied with the exiting records that no further information is required from the petitioner and no further record is required to be produced by the petitioner, then the respondent no.2, after carrying out necessary formalities shall pass a reasoned order, in accordance with law.

9.

This exercise shall be carried out positively within a period of four weeks being the outer limit from the date of communication of this order.

10.

In the event, the reasoned order goes in favour of the petitioner, necessary steps shall be taken forthwith to correct the revenue records, in accordance with law.

11.

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of this writ petition.

12.

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

12. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition WPA/97/2025 stands disposed of, without any order as to costs.

( Aniruddha Roy, J. )