Shri. Balakrishnan Nair v. The Tehsildar

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/500/2025 Shri Balakrishnan Nair Vs.

The Tehsildar Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar Ms. Vinita Devi ... for the petitioner Ms. Babita Das ... for the respondent November 6, 2025 [SR] Item No. 7 The petitioner claims to be the recorded tenant of a land in survey no. 1995, measuring an area of 0.207 hectares situated at Calicut Village. According to the petitioner, he was an encroacher prior to 1978. Under the relevant scheme, he was entitled to continue to occupy the said land. The petitioner contends that a structure had been constructed thereon and he was residing with his family.

The allegation is that a demolition was carried out by an order of the Tehsildar, without compliance of Regulation 202. Neither any notice was given nor was the petitioner heard. Moreover, all the belongings of the petitioner had been taken away by the authority. The petitioner values such materials between Rs.20-25 lakhs.

A notice was issued by the learned advocate for the petitioner, informing the authorities that a suit will be filed for declaration of the right, title and interest of the petitioner in terms of the pre-1978 encroachment policy.

Ms. Babita Das, learned Government Pleader submits that the petitioner was given adequate notice. He did not appear

before the authority. He intended to file a suit. The writ petition should be dismissed as not maintainable.

Heard the parties.

The Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulation,1966 and the Rules framed thereunder, provide for a remedy by way of a statutory appeal. The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the Tehsildar and the procedure followed by the Tehsildar in the matter. The petitioner's remedy would be before the concerned Sub Divisional Officer, by way of an appeal. The petitioner shall file such appeal.

The appellate authority will consider the following issues while disposing of the appeal to be preferred by the petitioner. (a) Whether a notice contemplated under the Regulations was served upon the petitioner.

(b) Whether the petitioner was given an opportunity of hearing and an opportunity to produce documents, in support of his encroachment prior to 1978.

(c) Whether articles had actually been removed by the Tehsildar without any inventory.

(d) If the Tehsildar had taken away any article or personal belongings of the petitioner, how the same could be returned and if those were damaged or destroyed, how he could be compensated.

(e) Whether the notice issued by the petitioner's advocate would have restrained the Tehsildar from proceeding with the demolition, at least for a period of three months.

The allegations are deemed to be denied as no affidavitin-opposition has been called for. All the issues are left open, to be decided in accordance with law.

The appeal shall be preferred within two weeks from date and the same shall be disposed of within one month, thereafter. Complete opportunity shall be given to the petitioner to place his case and rely on necessary materials.

The writ petition is, thus, dispose of.

Parties to act in terms of the server copy of this order downloaded from the website of this Hon'ble Court. ( Shampa Sarkar, J. )