Mamta Mandal v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR *** WPA/945/2023 Mamta Mandal Vs The Andaman & Nicobar Administration and Others Mr. K.M.B. Jayapal ... for the appellants Mr. V.D.Sivabalan ... for the respondents October 10, 2023 [SR] Item No.18 Heard learned counsels for the parties.
The writ petitioner seeks a writ of prohibition restraining the respondent authorities from raising any obstruction to development of the plot in question by the petitioner under Regulation 157 of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulation, 1966. The petitioner is representing the recorded tenants of the plot in question, who have executed a general power of attorney in her favour in this regard.
On prayer of the petitioner, liberty is granted to amend the cause title of the application in tune with the general power of attorney granted by the tenants.
On merits, it is not in dispute that Shri Gowri Shanker Das and Jayanta Das are the recorded tenants in respect of the plot in question.
The tenants intend to develop the plot in terms of the Regulation 157 of the Regulation, 1966. It shall be useful to reproduce the Regulation 157:- "157.(1) A tenant shall be entitled to make any improvement in his holding for the better cultivation of the land or its more convenient use:
Provided that he shall not plant trees in such a way as to diminish the value of any land not included in his holding. (2) If a tenant plants, or proposes to plant, trees in such a way as to diminish the value of any land not included in his holding, any person affected thereby may apply to the Tahsildar for prohibiting the planting of trees on such land or directing the tenant to remove the trees already planted thereon and the Tahsildar may, after hearing the parties, either grant the application subject to such conditions as he thinks fit or reject it. (3) If a tenant has effected any improvement or any land comprised in his holding and his interest in the holding is extinguished under clause (b) or claue (c) or clause (e) of section 162, he shall be entitled to receive, on such extinguished, such compensation for it as the revenue officer may determine in accordance with the provision of sub-section[4].
(4) The amount of compensation determined by the revenue office shall be the value of the improvement at the time of extinguishment of the tenancy, estimated with due regard to - (a) the amount by which the value of the interest of the tenant in the land has increased by the improvement; (b) the condition of the improvement at the time of determination of compensation and the probable duration of its effect;
(c) the labour and capital provided or spend by the tenant for making of the improvement; and (d) any other matter which may be prescribed." The term "improvement" has been defined in Regulation 2(12) of the Regulation, 1966.
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the writ is not maintainable for the reason that the petitioner has filed the writ petition in her personal capacity and not on behalf of the tenants, on the anvil of the power of attorney executed in her favour.
The petitioner being allowed to amend the cause title of the application in tune with the general power of attorney, the writ petition cannot be discarded on that score. No submission is made by the respondents on merits.
Since the tenants are entitled to make improvement in the holding for better cultivation of the land or its more convenient use in terms of the Regulation 157, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the tenants, being represented by the petitioner, to improve the plot in question strictly in terms of Regulation 157 of the Regulation 1966.
The authorities are restrained from causing any obstruction to such improvement provided such improvement is done strictly in terms of the relevant Regulation. The writ petition being WPA/945/2023 is accordingly disposed of. There shall be, however, no order as to costs. Since affidavit has not been invited, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, may be supplied to the parties upon compliance of usual formalities.
( Suvra Ghosh, J. )