Shri Mohammed Ebrahim Jadwet v. Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ORS.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...
WPA/975/2022 Shri Mohammed Ebrahim Jadwet and another ... Petitioners Vs.
The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others ... Respondents Mr. Mohammed Tabraiz ... for the petitioners Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty Mr. Ramendu Agarwal ... for the respondents December 22, 2022 [SR] Item No.22 By an order dated 21st September, 2022 passed by this Court in WPA/416/2022, a Coordinate Bench had directed the respondent to consider petitioner's application for transfer his land, under Rule 9 (b) of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms(Amendment) Rules, 2017. The respondent has not done so, despite lapse of three months. This is a contumacious conduct.
The petitioners are brothers who were 82 years and 74 years respectively. They obtained order of diversion (conversion) of the land from residential to commercial in the year 2018.
It is submitted that one of the brothers now stay in United States of America and want to dispose of the land in
question during their life time. They applied for permission to so dispose of the land accepting the rigors of Rule 9(b) of the aforesaid amended Regulation. The said representation has not been considered, despite specific order of this Court. Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty, learned counsel for the respondents seeks time to file an affidavit to bring on record a policy decision of the Government not to permit any diversion whatsoever.
The issue to be decided is only whether the reversion of the land back to a house site, consequent upon any permission to the petitioner to transfer the land to a third party is a consequence that follows from the application of Rule 9(b) is a voluntary conversion.
The automatic revision of land to housing from commercial by the operation of Rule 9(b) of the aforesaid Regulation, cannot be termed as any voluntary diversion (conversion). It is an automatic statutory consequence, if a land, converted to commercial category is sought to be alienated within 10 years therefore is not used for commercial purposes.
The land in question reverts to automatically to its original status of use i.e. "housing". No policy decision can be taken by the Administration in derogation of such automatic statutory consequence.
In the above circumstances, this Court is of the view that in the undisputed facts and interpretation of law that is
warranted in the instant case, no affidavit is required or called for from the respondents. The respondents are even otherwise already in violation of the order of a Coordinate Bench (supra).
In those circumstances, this Court permits the petitioners to transfer and/or alienate the subject land on the mandatory condition that such transfer would mean that the land in question is a house site/residential property. Such residential property may be transferred in accordance with law subject to compliance with other rules and conditions. WPA/975/2022 stands disposed of.
All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
( Rajasekhar Mantha, J. )