Shri.Ganga Din v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administraiton And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** MAT/39/2025 IA No. CAN/3/2025 Shri Ganga Din Vs.

The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and Others Mr. KMB Jayapal ... for the petitioner Ms. Babita Das ... for the Administration Mr. Lokesh Chezian ... for the pvt. respondent January 15, 2026 [Manoj] Item No.02 Mr. Kamaleshwar Rao S, Sub-Divisional Officer, South Andaman is personally present in Court. He submits through Ms. Babita Das, learned advocate representing the official respondents that the letter dated September 11, 2025 address to him, letter written by Shri Ganga Din one of the party to the Other Suit No. 82 of 2025 by which the pendency of this appeal was inferred had been submitted in the department but was not placed before him either at the time of the passing of the order dated January 12, 2026 or prior thereto. He further submits through his learned advocate that there was no intention on his part to over reach the orders of the Court.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, since the said order dated January 12, 2026 was passed after passing of the order of the learned Single Judge on July 21, 2025 as also after filing of the instant appeal, we set aside the said order dated

January 12, 2026 in order to remove conflict of orders and future complication, if any.

We have perused the order of the learned Single Judge. Without going into the merits, we find that the writ petition does not make out a case for which the same was required to be entertained relaxing the principle of alternative efficacious remedy. We find that under the Regulation 28 of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulation, 1966, an appeal lies from an order of the Tehsildar before the concerned Sub Division Officer.

The writ Court is not the fact finding Court or can go into the disputed questions of fact. The appellate forum that of the concerned Sub Divisional Officer is otherwise equipped to deal with the factual aspect of the matter.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we set aside the order dated July 21, 2025 being the order impugned in this appeal only on the ground of alternative efficacious remedy available to the writ petitioner.

We also grant liberty to the petitioner to approach the Court of the concerned Sub Divisional Officer within January 30, 2026 to challenge the order of the Tehsildar dated July 01, 2025 on all points.

It is made clear that in the event the appellant/writ petitioner prefers an appeal by January 30, 2026, the same should be decided on merits without going into the point of delay in preferring such appeal. The concerned Sub Divisional Officer shall decide the appeal already filed before him as also

any appeal that may be filed by the appellant/writ petitioner within the time specified hereinafter on merits by a reasoned order dealing with all the issues as raised after giving personal hearing to the parties and considering the documents that may be placed by them.

The Sub Divisional Officer shall not be influenced by any observations made herein while deciding the appeal and shall deal with the issues independently.

We also make it clear that we have not entered into the merits of the matter and have not expressed any opinion relating to the merits of the same.

The entire exercise should be completed by March 13, 2026. Immediately upon passing of the order, the Sub Divisional Officer shall communicate the same to the concerned parties.

The appeal and the connected application as also the writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(Arindam Mukherjee, J.) ( Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.)