Calcutta High CourtWPA/904/2023disposed

Parwathi v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And Others

2023-12-19Hon'Ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] ...

WPA/904/2023 Parwathi Vs.

The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others Mr. KMB Jayapal ... for the petitioner Mr. V.D.Sivabalan Mr. Arun S. Kumar ... for the respondents December 19, 2023 [AKB] Item No.1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondents. An order dated 14th January, 2019 was passed by the High Court in WP No. 014 of 2019 passing direction as follows:

"There appears a triable issue between the parties and upon hearing Mr. Mandal, learned senior counsel for the respondent authorities, I dispose of the writ application with direction upon the Tehsildar, Port Blair to give reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and also to the respondent No. 4 within three weeks and to pass a reasoned order and then only to proceed with the demarcation."

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that an order dated 14th March, 2023 has been passed in compliance to the said order (page 42 Annexure P 10), wherein one of the observations is as follows:- "And whereas, in order to check the veracity of the contention whether the land of Smti. Parwati D/o Laxmaiah is under occupation of Shri, D. Laxman Rao S/o Late Sarathi or not the demarcation of the land conducted on various occasions and to corroborate the same again the demarcation notice issued on 16/12/2022 per contra the petitioner Smti. Parwati D/o Laxmaiah had not allowed the demarcation to be conducted and raised objection before the Revenue Surveyor to not to demarcate the land again;" It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, on 12.03.2021 demarcation in respect of the land in question was conducted by the Tehsildar, which is in complete disregard of the order of the High Court passed in WP 014 of 2019 dated 14th January, 2019.

Accordingly, in view of the observations as made above it appears that the order dated 14th March, 2023 has been passed in violation of this Court's order dated 14th January, 2019 in WP No. 014 of 2019, wherein it categorically directed that first a reasoned order would be passed and only then demarcation would be carried out. In the present case the order dated 14.03.2023 is completely against the said direction, as a demarcation report dated 24.03.2021 has been filed. On perusal of the said demarcation report it appears that it relates to the land in the present. (Survey No. being 250/2 and 250/3 has been noted in para 3 and 4 of the said order). Accordingly, the order dated 14th March, 2023 being not in accordance with the direction of the Court is set aside.

The respondent herein is directed to hear the parties afresh and pass a fresh order in the said matter as directed by the High Court in WP No. 014 of 2019 dated 14th January, 2019 within a period of two months from the dated of communication of this order and on passing final order, only then proceed for necessary demarcation, as per the findings given in the fresh order, which is to be passed by considering all the materials on record and on hearing all the parties in accordance with law. Affidavits-of-service filed in respect of the respondent No. 3 and 4 shows that service has returned with the endorsement 'insufficient address'. It is submitted that the address sent to, is the address on record. Accordingly the affidavit-of-service be kept with the record. (Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.)