The Lt.Governor And ORS. v. A. Sunder

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** MAT/35/2024 IA No.CAN/1/2024, CAN/2/2024 With MAT/40/2024 IA No.CAN/1/2024, CAN/2/2024 The Lieutenant Governor and others Vs.

A. Sunder Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi ... for the appellants Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar ... for the respondent November 7, 2024 [SR] Item No.5&6 Re: CAN/1/2024 in MAT/35/2024 with CAN/1/2024 in MAT/40/2024 1.

Sufficient grounds are available to explain 18 days delay in filing of the instant appeals.

2.

Delay is condoned.

3.

Accordingly, applications for condonation of delay are disposed of.

Re: MAT/35/2024 with CAN/2/2024 with MAT/40/2024 with CAN/2/2024 4.

The appeals are directed against the order dated 3rd April, 2024 passed by the learned Single Bench in WPA/246/2019 and WPA/248/2019.

5.

The undisputed facts are that two water pipe lines for supplying water to the city of the Port Blair have been located underneath the respondent's land by the Administration. 6.

It is submitted that at the relevant point of time, MES may have laid down those pipe lines with the consent of the predecessor of the respondent/writ petitioner. It was also stated before the Single Bench in the earlier proceeding that the land may have been acquired by the State.

7.

There is no evidence of any acquisition of the said land by the State. There is no permission from the predecessor of the writ petitioner/respondent produced by the local authorities. 8.

The Single Bench granted the Administration six months time to remove the pipe lines and redirect the same. 9.

The period has elapsed.

10.

The Administration instead of diverting the pipe lines, have chosen to file the instant appeal.

11.

Mr. Chakraborty feels that there may be many other cases of similar nature in the Islands and the present orders in this proceeding should not be treated as precedent. 12.

This Court is of the view that the right to property is recognized under Article 330 A as a constitutional right. The State, to use the private land, is required to take steps in accordance with law, inter alia, to acquire the same. The State cannot even acquire the private land under Article 39(B) with under the protection of Article 31(C) as recently mandated by the nine Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Property Owner's Association and others vs. State of

Maharashtra and others being SLP(C) 5777 of 1992, delivered on 5th November, 2024.

13.

Therefore, the Administration is given a last chance of three months to remove the pipe lines from the respondent's land and divert supply of water to the city of Port Blair from other sources. In default, the respondent/writ petitioner shall be entitled to dismantle and destroy the said pipe line for the purpose of effecting construction on his property. 14.

With the aforesaid observations, the appeal stands disposed of and all connected applications are also disposed of. 15.

There shall be no order as to costs.

16.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all formalities. ( Rajasekhar Mantha, J. ) ( Partha Sarathi Sen, J. )