Shakeel Ahmed @ Sakeel Ahmed v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/435/2024 Shakeel Ahmed @ Sakeel Ahmed Vs The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others Ms. G.Mini ... for the petitioner Ms. Babita Das ... for the respondents August 28, 2024 [AKB] Item No.10 Learned advocate for the petitioner and learned advocate for the respondents are present. Heard learned advocates for the parties.

The grievance of the petitioner in this writ application is this an application made by the writ petitioner on 15.09.2022 before the Deputy Commissioner, South Andaman, Port Blair for sub-division of the land is not yet considered and decided.

Upon perusal of the records, it appears that pursuant to the application made by the petitioner, the Assistant Commissioner by letter dated 24.11.2022 requested the petitioner to submit a fresh proposal map rectifying the discrepancies for further process of the case. The petitioner, pursuant to the said letter, intimated the Assistant Commissioner (Settlement) that the measurements of all sides are mentioned in the said map. Thereafter, by letter dated 23.12.2022, the Assistant Commissioner (S) intimated the petitioner that on scrutiny of the documents filed by them, the following discrepancies have been found.

(i) On calculation, the area proposed, Sy.No.2639/1/(B)/P/1 comes excess than the excess mentioned area.

The petitioner was requested to submit a fresh proposal map rectifying the above discrepancy for further process of the case.

Considering the facts of case, this Court is of the view that no fruitful purpose will be served by directing the respondents to file affidavit-in-opposition.

Thus, writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent no.2 to consider and decide the application made by the petitioner dated 15.09.2022, after giving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard.

It is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that his client is ready and willing to rectify the irregularity in the earlier proposal submitted by his client and further ready to clarify anything which is required by the authorities.

The application of the petitioner should be disposed in accordance with law and by a reasoned order preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order.

It is made clear that as no affidavit-in-opposition has been filed, the allegations are not deemed to be admitted. ( Biswaroop Chowdhury, J.)