Chittaranjan Roy v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And Another
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...
WPA/802/2023 Shri Chittaranjan Roy ... Petitioner Vs.
The Andaman & Nicobar Administration and Anr. ... Respondents Mr. Alisham Venkatesh ...for the Petitioner Mr. V.D. Sivabalan Mr. Arun S. Kumar ...for the Respondents July 21, 2023 (M.A.Mobin) Item No.23 The present writ application has been filed, inter alia, praying for a direction upon the respondent No.2 to demarcate the land bearing Survey No. 63 situated at Rabindra Nagar Village, Litter Andaman Tehsil, South Andaman District, A & N Islands, by deputing a survey team with modern survey equipment.
The petitioner claims to be a recorded tenant of a landed property bearing Survey No. 63 situated at Rabindra Nagar Village, Little Andaman (hereinafter referred to as the said property). The petitioner claims that he had earlier applied for surveying and for demarcating the aforesaid property.
Since the respondents did not take any steps despite reminders, petitioner was compelled to invoke
extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court by filing a writ petition.
On contest, by an order dated 8th August, 2018, a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court was, inter alia, pleased to direct the petitioner to make an appropriate representation before Assistant Commissioner (Settlement), South Andaman District. It was also provided in such order that in the event the petitioner makes the representation within the time specified, the Assistant Commissioner (Settlement), South Andaman, shall fix a date for causing survey of the land-in-question after giving appropriate notice to the interested parties including the petitioner and such survey shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of notice to the parties and the report thereof, shall be communicated to the petitioner.
Pursuant to the aforesaid order the petitioner having made a representation a survey was carried out, however, since, during the survey no survey stone could be identified, demarcation was carried out taking the road and fencing of the spot, as reference points. This, according to the petitioner did not even provide for a reasonably accurate demarcation, which he is entitled to. Mr. Venkatesh. learned Advocate representing the petitioner by drawing attention of this Court to the Survey report submits that Surveyor himself in his report had recorded that the petitioner was not satisfied with the
demarcation and as such had recommended fresh survey with modern survey equipment.
Although, the Tehsildar, by his letter dated 14th January, 2019, had called upon Assistant Commissioner (Settlement) to send a team with modern survey equipment to carry out the survey, no further survey work has been undertaken.
Mr. Venkatesh submits that unless a specific direction is issued by this Court for caring out fresh survey work with modern equipment the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.
Mr. Sivabalan, Learned Advocate enters appearance on behalf of the Administration, he, however, acknowledges the fact that no further survey has been carried out. Having regard to the aforesaid and taking into consideration the fact that previous survey was carried out without there being any survey stone or a proper reference point, I am of the view that a fresh survey with modern survey equipment is required to be carried out. The petitioner has legal right to have his property demarcated. The respondents cannot sit idle over the aforesaid issue.
Having regard to the same, I direct the Assistant Commissioner (Settlement) to take steps for conducting a fresh survey on plot No.63 and adjoining plots for the purpose of proper demarcation of plot No. 63 as aforesaid. The aforesaid survey shall be carried out within a period of
eight weeks from the date of communication of this order upon prior notice to the petitioner and other persons interested.
Since, no affidavits have been called for the allegations made in the petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents.
With the aforesaid observation and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.
(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)