The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ANR v. Smti.Rehana Begum
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** MAT/56/2024 IA No.CAN/1/2024, CAN/2/2024 Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others Vs.
Smt Rehana Begum Mr. Rakesh Kumar ... for the appellants Ms.G.Mini ... for the respondent November 18, 2024 [SR] Item no. 9 Re: CAN/1/2024 1.
Sufficient grounds are available to explain the delay of 26 days in filing the instant appeal.
2.
The delay is condoned.
3.
CAN/1/2024 is disposed of.
Re: MAT/56/2024 and CAN/2/2024 4.
The challenge in the instant appeal to an order dated 24.06.2024 passed by the Single Bench of this Court in WPA/940/2023 (Smt Rehana Begum vs. The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others).
5.
By the impugned judgment, the decision of the Sub Divisional Officer, South Andaman dated 17.08.2023 rejecting the petitioner's prayer for diversion of the land from agricultural to residential, was set aside.
6.
The brief facts of the case are that the writ petitioner is the recorded tenant of land measuring about 228 Sq.mtrs under Survey No.818/5 at Calicut Village.
7.
She applied for conversion of the said land in June, 2019 before the Sub Divisional Officer, South Andaman. The Sub Divisional Officer issued a final notice to the petitioner asking the petitioner to appear for hearing and approve the petitioner's prayer for diversion of the land in question into house site on 04.09.2019.
8.
He further directed the petitioner to deposit premium which has been paid by the petitioner on 11.11.2019. The aforesaid act of permitting diversion has been performed by the Sub Divisional Officer in terms of Regulation 40 (1) (6) of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulation, 1966. However, no formal order of diversion was issued to the petitioner.
9.
Upon a writ petition being filed by the writ petitioner/ respondents, being WPA/896/2022, a Single Bench of this court, by an order dated December 15, 2022 directed the Sub Divisional Officer to dispose of the representation of the writ petitioner and take a suitable decision and pass a formal order of diversion.
10.
Strangely, notwithstanding the order passed by his predecessor on 29.07.2019 and 04.09.2019 and payment of premium by the petitioner on 11.11.2019, the new Sub
Divisional Officer by the impugned order dated 15.11.2023 refused diversion.
11.
The sole ground for refusal of such diversion is that the new master plan is being evolved by the Andaman and Nicobar Administration for dealing with the land on the Islands. 12.
It is submitted that pending such new master plan, no applications for diversion would be entertained. 13.
The impugned order to say the least is arbitrary and capricious. The new Sub Divisional Officer has in fact sat in an appeal and reversed the order of his predecessor which is ex facie illegal. Further, Sub-Regulation 6 of Regulation 40 stipulates that once the diversion has been allowed and the premium is paid, there is a defacto conversion allowed by the respondents.
14.
By payment of premium by the writ petitioner, the order of the earlier SDO was accepted and acted upon by the writ petitioner.
15.
The new Sub Divisional Officer was, therefore, estopped refusing the issue of the formal order of diversion. 16.
No such master plan as observed by the Sub Divisional Officer in the impugned order is available or has been produced before this Court. In such circumstances, the impugned order has been correctly and rightly set aside by the Single Bench. 17.
There is, however, a minor error on the part of the Single Bench in holding that the Sub Divisional Officer is not a
revenue officer within the meaning of Regulation, 1966 in para 12 thereof.
18.
Regulation 10(1)(2) and Regulation 28(1)(c) as also Regulation 40 of 1966 Regulation authorize the Sub Divisional Officer to act as a Revenue Officer for the purpose of deciding the cases for diversion of land.
19.
The order of Single Bench is only modified to the aforesaid limited extent that the SDO is competent to pass an order of diversion and also to act as Revenue Officer. 20.
Ms.G.Mini, learned advocate for the respondent refers to a decision of a Coordinate Bench in MAT/27/2023 ( Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor and others vs. Smartspace Infrastructure Private Limited and others) dated June 24, 2024 whereby the Sub Divisional Officer was held to be a competent authority to decide and issue of diversion of land. The Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petition preferred against by an order dated June 24, 2024.
21.
In view of the above, MAT/56/2024 shall stand dismissed and consequently the connected applications if any also stand disposed of.
22.
There shall be no order as to costs.
23.
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. )