Kanan Mondal v. The Deputy Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE [CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] *** WPA/220/2021 Kanan Mondal and others ... Petitioner Vs The Deputy Commissioner and others ... Respondents Mr. N.A.Khan, Advocate ... for the petitioner Mr. A.K.Mandal, Advocate Mr. Sumit Karmakar, Advocate ... for the respondents September 16, 2021 (SR) Item No. 8 The petitioners are seeking a direction upon respondent authorities particularly upon the respondent No.2 to consider the application dated 22/3/2019 and 13/07/2019 and further to consider his demand justice notice dated 22.06.2020 by granting occupancy right and demarcating the land of the writ petitioners.

The petitioners' case, in brief, is that the petitioners filed Title Suit No116 of 2011 for partition of the suit land and after contested hearing suit was decreed in preliminary form directing the parties for amicable partition of the property. No partition could be done amicably, the petitioners applied to the said court for appointment of partition commissioner. Accordingly, the Tehsildar, Port Blair was appointed, who after inspection and taking measurement, proposed the portion and submitted his report which was not challenged by any of the parties and the Trial Court passed the final decree.

According to the petitioners, on the basis of the final partition decree, the petitioners approached the Deputy Commissioner for having separate sub-division in the record of right and map and the Deputy Commissioner by exercising his power under the regulation and ordered for correction of the revenue records. On getting separate record of rights and sketch map, the petitioners applied to the Tehsildar for demarcation of the land and also for granting/confirming occupancy right. The

petitioners have also sent the demand justice notice to the Tehsildar, Port Blair on 22.06.2020 but the revenue authorities did not take any steps on the application of the petitioners.

I have heard Mr. Khan, learned advocate appearing for the respondent and Mr. A.K.Mandal alongwith Mr. Sumit Karmakar, learned counsel for the respondents. The petitioner having made representation on the various dates has not been taken care of by the respondent authorities so ultimately, he submitted demand justice for nonaction before the Tehsildar.

In the context of the above and considering the innocuous prayer of the writ petitioners, the respondent no. 2 is directed to consider the representation so made before him and further to consider the demand justice notice dated 22.06.2020 within a period of four weeks and to pass a reasoned order by giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner of being heard and further to communicate a copy of the reasoned order to the petitioner within one week thereafter.

Thus, the writ application being WPA/220/2021 is disposed, however, there shall be no order as to costs. Parties are directed to act on the server copy of this order downloaded from the official website.

(Shivakant Prasad, J.)