Shri.B. Venkata Krishnan v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ORS.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION [CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] ******** PRESENT: HON'BLE JUSTICE SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL) WPA/390/2025 Shri B. Venkata Krishnan ... Petitioner
Versus
The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and Others ... Respondents For the petitioner : Ms. G. Mini For the respondents : Ms. Babita Das Heard on : 12.12.2025 Judgment on : 17.12.2025 SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.
1.
The writ petition has been preferred praying for direction upon the respondents to set aside the impugned rejection order dated 28.07.2025 passed by Respondent No. 3 and to direct the respondent No. 2 to grant Sale Permission to the Petitioner for the land bearing Survey No. 2399/3 area 22 Sq Mts out of total area 0.0098 Hects, situated at Shadipur village, within Sri Vijaya Puram (Port Blair) Tehsil, District of South Andaman. 2.
It is the case of the petitioner that the Writ Petitioner has purchased the land bearing Survey No 2399/3 area 22 Sq Mts out of total area 0.0098 Hects, situated at Shadipur village,
within Sri Vijaya Puram (Port Blair) Tehsil, District of South Andaman on the dint of a Sale Deed along with other persons. The mutation was done in the joint names of all the purchasers and it is recorded jointly in the name of petitioner along with other purchasers in Revenue records.
3.
That in these Islands prior to selling of the Property permission is required from the Revenue Department. 4.
The Petitioner has applied through online on 19.05.2025 along with mandatory documents before the Deputy Commissioner, South Andaman for obtaining Sale permission as per Section 159(9) of the A & N Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulation, 1966.
5.
The petitioner's application for Sale Permission was rejected on 28.07.2025. This rejection was communicated on an official letter head of the Deputy Commissioner's office but was signed by the Revenue Inspector (Reader to the Deputy Commissioner), not by the Deputy Commissioner himself or any other authorized competent authority. The letter cited only one ground for rejection - that the petitioner had not included the names/details of the co-tenants in the application. In effect, the petitioner was denied permission on the basis that his co-owners' particulars or consent were not furnished.
6.
The rejection letter notably bore no signature or endorsement of the Deputy Commissioner. The letter also did not afford the Petitioner any opportunity of being heard or to cure any supposed defect (such as by adding co-tenants' names, if so, mandated under law or documents) before summarily rejecting the application.
7.
The petitioner has relied upon an order of a Coordinate Bench passed in WPA/148/2025 dated 19.03.2025 wherein the Bench observed as follows :- "2. The authority concerned has refused to furnish any such details in absence of any no objection certificate from the other joint recorded tenants. This order is under challenge. In absence of any law which requires the joint tenants/cosharers to obtain necessary permission or no objection certificate from the other co-sharers, the authority cannot insist for such certificates. Transfer of undivided share in the joint property by co-sharers even to a stranger purchaser is not illegal.".
8.
In view of the order of the Coordinate Bench, it is made clear that the Deputy Commissioner shall not call for any NOC as done in the order dated 28.07.2025 which is under challenge.
9.
The petitioner has also relied upon a judgment of a Coordinate Bench passed in WPA/211/2008 dated 28.08.2008 wherein the Court held as follows :-
"After hearing Mrs. Nag, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Mandal, learned advocate appearing for the respondents this Court disposes of this writ petition by directing the Sub-Registrar, Port Blair, South Andaman District, the respondent No.3 to register the said sale deed upon compliance of the necessary formalities by the executant of the said deed as per the relevant provision of the Registration Act, 1908, as transfer of undivided share in the joint property by co-sharer even to a stranger purchaser is not illegal and as such, the registration of such sale deed cannot be denied.".
10.
The impugned order dated 28.07.2025 is as follows :- "As proposed by DC Reader, upon perusal of the ROR, it is observed that the landed property under reference is recorded in the joint names of multiple co-tenants. However, the application has been submitted solely in the name of the applicant, omitting the names of the other recorded co-tenants. As per the prescribed format of the application, the name of the applicant is required to be entered in the first column, while the names of the remaining joint holders are to be furnished in the column titled Details of Co-tenants. Further, NOC of co-tenant in the shape of affidavit duly sown before the Executive Magistrate or Notarized Advocate is required for obtaining Sale Permission. Since the filled in online application is not editable, the instant application needs to be rejected to apply a fresh by rectifying the observations. Hence rejected.". 11.
It appears that the said order has been issued from the office of the Deputy Commissioner, South Andaman District but admittedly it bears the digital signature of the Revenue Inspector, who is Reader to the Deputy Commissioner. 12.
For such permission, Regulation 159 Clause (9) of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulation, 1966, provides as follows :-
"Regulation 159 Clause (9) of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulation, 1966 - (9) The interest of a licence of non-agricultural land shall not be transferable except with the previous permission in writing of the Deputy Commissioner and subject to such terms and conditions as may be specified by him.
Provided that where within a period of four months after the receipt of any application from any licence, for permission to transfer his interest in any non-agricultural land being a house site, the Chief Commissioner does not refuse permission or upon refusal, does not communicate the refusal to the licence, then the Chief Commissioner shall be deemed to have granted permission for transfer.
* Explanation : I - For the purpose of this section "Scheduled Tribe" shall have the same meaning as in clause (25) of article 366 of the Constitution.
* Explanation : II - For the purpose of this section "Bank" means any banking company as defined in clause (c) of section 5 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and includes. (i) The State Bank of India constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955;
(ii) A subsidiary bank as defined in the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959;
(iii) A corresponding new bank constituted under section 3 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970;
(iv) The Agricultural Refinance and Development Co-operation established under the Agricultural Refinance and Development Cooperation Act, 1963;
(v) A Regional Rural Bank established under sub-section [1] of section 3 of the Regional Bank Act, 1976;
(vi) Any banking institution notified by the Central Govt. under section 52 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949; (vii) Any other financial or banking institution notified by the Central Government in the Official Gazette as a bank for the purpose of this Regulation".
13.
Learned Counsel for the respondent administration has placed the copy of the application form submitted by the petitioner herein before the authorities. From the last column at land addressed it appears that the column for total number of tenants (excluding the applicant) has been shown as zero. Whereas admittedly the petitioner in his writ application has admitted that the land has been purchased by the writ petitioner along with other persons and that the mutation was also done in the joint names of all the purchasers and has also been recorded jointly in the revenue records. As such, it appears that the petitioner has not disclosed the details as required in the application.
14.
The impugned order states that online applications cannot be altered, and liberty was given to the petitioner to file a fresh application.
15.
Thus, considering the case as made out by both the parties and on perusal of the materials on record it is directed that the petitioner herein will submit a fresh application disclosing all details and not suppressing any of the information as required by the authority concerned and called for, in their application form within 15 days from the date of this order.
16.
The authority concerned herein being the Deputy Commissioner shall himself decide the application submitted seeking permission and pass the necessary orders without delegating the same to any other officer within 30 days from the date of filing of the application, without asking for an NOC.
17.
Consequently, the order dated 28.07.2025 passed on behalf of the Deputy Commissioner by the Revenue Inspector (Reader to the Deputy Commissioner) vide Certificate No. 20251011SGR0000000359 dated 28.07.2025 is hereby set aside, the same being not in accordance with law. 18.
With the above directions, the writ application stands disposed of.
19.
There shall, however, be no order as to costs. 20.
All connected application, if any, stands disposed of. 21.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this judgment, if applied for, shall be supplied to the parties as expeditiously as possible, upon compliance of all formalities.
[ SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J. ]