Rubi v. The Tehsildar

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/174/2025 Smt. Rubi Vs.

The Tehsildar Mr. Vishal Kumar Biswas ... for the petitioner Ms. Babita Das ... for the respondent March 24, 2025 [AKB] Item No.6 1.

The petitioner's claims that the petitioner had applied for demarcation of his land bearing survey No. 1/5 measuring an area 1.6 Hectares situated at Caddle Gunj village under Ferrargunj Tehsil, District South Andaman. The petitioner would claim by referring to the copy of the record of rights issued in form 'F' that the name of the petitioner is recorded as a tenant. According to the petitioner, the petitioner had made an application for carrying out demarcation of the petitioner's property. Unfortunately, although a notice was issued on 6th February, for carrying out demarcation, no demarcation proceedings actually took place. The petitioner would further contend that the name of the petitioner does not appear in the list of noticee appearing in such letter. 2.

Ms.

Babita Das, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents would however, submit that the copy of the application filed by the petitioner for demarcation has not been annexed. She would further

submit that on perusal of the notice dated 6th February, 2025, it would transpire that the name of the petitioner also does not appear therein. Having regard thereto, according to her, no case for interference has been made out, no relief should be accorded to the petitioner.

3.

Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and noting that the petitioner has failed to disclose any application seeking demarcation before this Court, I am of the view that since, the petitioner's grievance is only with regard to demarcation, the present writ petition can be disposed of by permitting the writ petitioner to apply before the concerned Tehsildar for demarcation of his property. If any application is made by the petitioner within a period of four weeks from date, the concerned Tehsildar shall after consulting the records, and if it is found that the property is recorded in the name of the petitioner shall demarcate the petitioner's portion, in accordance with law after notifying and giving an opportunity of hearing to all interested parties including the petitioner.

4.

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of this case and the Tehsildar shall take a decision in the matter on merits in accordance with law being uninfluenced by any of the observations made herein. 5.

Since, no affidavit-in-opposition has been called for the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents.

6.

With the above observations and directions, the writ petition WPA/174/2025 stands disposed of.

7.

There shall be no order as to costs.

(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)