In this writ petition, the Calcutta High Court directed the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer to grant a hearing to the petitioner and pass a reasoned order within four weeks regarding the correction of the Record of Rights.
Directions to respondent No. 5 to grant opportunity of hearing and pass reasoned order within four weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
26 04.12.19 akb Ct. No. 2
Calcutta High Court In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Appellate Jurisdiction
W.P.A. 797 of 2019 Seema Gupta -Versus-
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Ms. Bandana Rai …For the Petitioner
Mr. Bikramaditya Ghosh
Mr. Momenur Rahaman …For State Respondents
This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated March 25, 2019 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Siliguri Jalpaiguri development Authority, rejecting his prayer for correction of the Record of Rights.
Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent authorities submits that the Siliguri Jalpaiguri Development Authority is not the appropriate authority to correct the Record of Rights of the petitioner and the appropriate authority is Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Matigara Land Reforms Office, being the respondent No. 5 herein.
I have learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the materials placed on record.
In the light of the above submissions, I direct the respondent No. 5 to grant an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and thereafter, to pass a reasoned order within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order.
2
Respondent No. 5 is also directed to communicate the reasoned order to the petitioner within a week from the date of passing the reasoned order.
With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
Since, no affidavit-in-opposition has been called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have not been admitted by the respondents.
There will be no order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, on priority basis.
( Shekhar B. Saraf, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Chief Executive Officer, Siliguri Jalpaiguri Development Authority is the appropriate authority to correct the Record of Rights.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Seema Gupta
The State of West Bengal
Shekhar B. Saraf
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
