Shri Naresh Halder v. The Deputy Commissioner And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...

WPA/936/2022 Naresh Halder ... Petitioner Vs.

The Deputy Commissioner and Others ... Respondents Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar ...for the Petitioner Mr. Arun S. Kumar ... for the respondents February 20, 2023 [Bithika] Item No.1 Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties.

Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging the impugned order dated 2nd December, 2022 passed by the Deputy Commissioner concerned / respondent No.1, North and Middle Andaman District, Mayabunder, on the ground of violation of principle of natural justice by not providing any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and not providing any copy of the alleged survey report dated 14th October, 2022, by the Tehshilder, Diglipur and the survey report dated 2nd November, 2022 by the Assistant Commissioner as referred in the aforesaid impugned order. It is an admitted position that neither petitioner was given any opportunity of hearing nor was provided with the copies of the aforesaid survey reports before passing the aforesaid impugned order.

Mr. Arun S. Kumar, learned Advocate representing the respondents could not satisfy this Court from record or contradict the aforesaid allegation made by the petitioner regarding denying the petitioner the opportunity of hearing and not providing the copies of the aforesaid survey reports upon which the respondent authorities concerned has relied and passed the impugned order directing for initiating appropriate action for the alleged illegal diversion of land in question and for de-sealing the stone crusher unit by compliance of the aforesaid impugned order.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case as appears from the record and submissions of the parties, this Writ Petition being WPA /936/2022 is disposed of by setting aside the aforesaid impugned order dated 2nd December, 2022 being Annexure P-9 to the Writ Petition and the matter is remanded back to the respondents authority concerned to pass a fresh and reasoned speaking order in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or his authorized representative, within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order.

Needless to mention that before passing a fresh order, the respondent authorities concerned shall provide either copies of the aforesaid survey report referred in the aforesaid impugned order or shall allow inspection of the same to the petitioner.

Till the date of passing of fresh order on the basis of this order, status quo as of today shall be maintained over the land in question by the parties.

It is recorded that the aforesaid impugned order has been set aside only on the ground of violation of principle of natural justice without going into merits of the case itself. (Md. Nizamuddin, J.)