Baburam Golder v. The Lt.Governor And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE [CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] ...

WPA/438/2024 Baburam Golder Vs.

The Lt. Governor and Ors.

Ms G. Mini ... for the petitioner Ms. Babita Das ... for the respondents August 29, 2024 (Bithika) Item No.4 Learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned Advocate for the Respondents are present.

Heard the learned Advocates.

The grievance of the petitioner is that, the petitioner encroached a forest land measuring an area of 1.85 hectare situated at Bandhan Nallah within the jurisdiction of Diglipur Forest, North and Middle Andaman District. The said land was encroached in the year, 1968 and after the encroachment, the petitioner developed the land by various plantation and constructed a residential house and had been residing thereon with his family members. It is contended by the petitioner that as per the policy decision of Government of India and the order dated 07.05.2002 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in W.P ( C) No. 202 of 1995 an area of 1 Hectare or the actual area in occupation prior to 31.12.1978 is to

be allotted to the De-Reserved Block (Pachimsagar) subject to the condition that the pre-1978 encroacher in the reserved forest area vacate said forest land and shifts to the above said De-Reserved Block. It is contended by the petitioner and submitted by the learned Advocate that in terms of the policy decision of Government of India and order dated 07.05.2002 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in W.P ( C) No. 202 of 1995 a notice dated 27.05.2002 was issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Diglipur to the petitioner and thereby it was directed to the petitioner to vacate his unauthorized occupation of an area of 1.

85 hectare of Government land situated at reserved forest land, Bandhan Nallah within one month from the date of receipt of the said notice to enable allotment of 1 hectare situated at Gandhi Nagar (De-Reserved Forest Block). It is also the contention of the petitioner that pursuant to the issuance of the notice of the Divisional Forest Officer, the petitioner vacated the land in his occupation but no alternative accommodation has been provided to the petitioner in terms of the policy decision of Government of India as well as the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court. Learned Advocate submits that due to inaction of this Respondent Authorities, his client is suffering hardship.

Upon hearing the learned Advocates, this Court is of the view that no fruitful purpose will be served by

keeping this matter pending and directing filing of affidavit. Thus, this application is disposed of by directing the Respondent Authorities to treat this Writ Application as a representation and take decision in accordance with law upon giving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. Such decision shall be taken within six weeks from the date of communication of this order and the same shall be communicated to the Writ Petitioner.

As affidavit-in-opposition is not filed, the allegation made in the petition is treated to be not admitted.

Thus, this Writ application stands disposed of. ( Biswaroop Chowdhury, J.)