Sukdev Mondal And ANR v. The Deputy Commissioner And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] ...

WPA/791/2023 Sukdev Mondal and another Vs.

The Deputy Commissioner and another Ms. Anjili Nag ... for the petitioners Mr.V.D.Sivabalan Mr. M.Laxmanan ... for the respondents July 19, 2023 (AKB) Item No.12 Mrs.

Nag, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners and their family members are the joint recorded tenants of land bearing survey nos. 576/1, 578, 579, 580, 989 measuring about 3.89 hectares. Out of the said quantum of land an area of 0.66 hectares was transferred to one Jagmohan Ram. However, while preparing the record of holding, the land of the petitioners and their relatives including that of Jagmohan Ram was quantified to be 3.2300 hectares though the same ought to have been 3.89 hectares. For correction of such erroneous entry, the petitioner no.1 submitted a representation to the respondent no.1 on 3rd May, 2023. In the midst thereof, the respondent no. 2 issued a stay order on the basis of an alleged complaint lodged by one Shri.

Nakul Mondal, son of Late Dwijabar Mondal, residing at Kadamtala, Rangat Tehsil vide memo dated 5th April, 2023. In the said memo it has, inter alia, been alleged that the petitioner no.2 was raising semi pucca structure construction over edge of land bearing survey no. 586. The stay order has been issued in a proceeding initiated by the said respondent no.2 being F.No.3-17/TR/RGT/2023/280 till demarcation of the dispute land and diversion of land. Mrs.

expired but no final decision has been taken by the Tehsildar. In the backdrop of the said facts, Mrs. Nag prays for issuance of necessary direction upon the Tehsildar to conclude the proceedings.

Mr. Sivabalan, learned advocate appearing for the Administration denies and disputes the contention of the petitioners.

From the memo dated 5th April, 2023 it appears that the respondent no. 2 has granted a stay order till demarcation of dispute land and diversion of land but no steps have been taken to conclude the proceedings. The same cannot be kept pending for an indefinite period. In view thereof, this Court directs the respondent no.2 to conclude the proceedings being F.No.317/TR/RGT/2023/280 and to take a decision in accordance with law, upon granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, the complainant, namely, Nakul Mondal and other interested parties, if any and to communicate such decision to the petitioners and the complainant. The above exercise shall be completed by the respondent no. 2 within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order alongwith a copy of the writ petition.

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the petitioners' claim and all points are kept open to be decided by the respondent no. 2.

With the above observations and directions the writ petition, being WPA/791/2023 is disposed of.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, may be supplied to the parties upon compliance of usual formalities.

(Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)