Lakhi Kumari Mondal v. The Sub Divisional Officer, South Andaman
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/164/2024 (IA No: CAN/1/2024) Lakhi Kumari Mondal Vs.
The Sub-Divisional Officer, South Andaman Mr. Ananda Halder .... for the petitioner Mr.Shatadru Chakraborty Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi ... for the respondents March 1, 2024 [SR] Item No.10 This is an application challenging the order dated 22.02.2024 passed by the respondent in RC No.17/2022/SDO thereby rejecting the application for diversion of land for alternative use without giving any opportunity of hearing.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner had prayed for a direction on the respondent authorities to consider an application made by the petitioner for diversion of land on 20.01.2022. Admittedly, the petitioner was a recorded tenant of areas of land bearing survey nos.93 and 94. The petitioner had applied in the prescribed format under Rule 4(A) of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Rules, 1968 for permitting him to divert the land for the purpose of making construction for residential purpose. The authorities sat over the representations for almost two years. Finally, the Tehsildar, Ferrargunj proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 22.12.2023 directing the petitioner to immediately stop the construction activities on the ground that the construction was allegedly in violation of the Rules. The petitioner was constrained to move this Court by filing the WPA/47/2024. By an order dated
05.02.2024 passed in the said writ petition, a Coordinate Bench of this Court disposed of the same with the direction on the respondent authorities to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 21.11.2022 within six weeks. The said order was stayed for four weeks from the date on which the decision of the authority on the representation would be communicated to the petitioner It was recorded in the said order that as per the report of the Assistant Commissioner, South Andaman District, all the diversion case including the case of the petitioner had been kept pending for finalization of policy decision. The report also found that the petitioner had illegally diverted the land by construction the building. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the petitioner was served with a notice of hearing. He appeared on 09.02.
2024 and was heard, but the file was not available. The next date for hearing was fixed on 28.02.2024. When the petitioner went to attend the hearing on 28.02.2024, he found that an order has already been passed on 22.02.2024 by the Sub Divisional Officer rejecting the prayer for diversion. This was, prima facie, bad in law. No opportunity of hearing was given. As there was violation of principles of natural justice, this Court can fairly entertain the writ petition without relegating the petitioner to seek alternative remedy. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Administration denies any wrong doing on the part of the respondents and submits that in the event the respondent authorities are asked to decide the matter afresh, a reasonable time may be granted.
It, prima facie, appears from the records that a notice of hearing was given to the petitioner to appear before the Sub Divisional Officer, South Andaman District on 28.02.2024 at 4.00 pm for the purpose of hearing.
petitioner to appear on 28.02.2024 was purportedly issued on 23.02.2024. Yet, before any hearing could take place, a final decision was taken on 22.02.2024.
This is a complete violation of principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained in the eye of law.
Therefore, the impugned order dated 22.02.2024 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Sub Divisional Officer, South Andaman District to hear and decide the matter afresh, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order. A reasonable notice shall be given to the petitioner to appear for hearing.
With these observations, the writ petition and the connected application are disposed of.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of the judgment, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all legal formalities. ( Jay Sengupta, J. )