Disposed

Soumya Kanti Roy v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Calcutta HC16 Nov 2021WPA/4041/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the non-consideration of his application for reference to the Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 regarding land acquired under the West Bengal Act. The court ordered the respondent authority to examine the application and decide it within two months after providing a hearing.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent No. 3 to consider and dispose of the petitioner's application filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 dated 6th August, 2003, within two months after affor

Soumya Kanti Roy Vs State of West Bengal & Ors. — Specific Performance | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

November 16, 2021 ARDR (12)

¶2

WPA 4041 of 2019

¶3

Soumya Kanti Roy Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶4

Mr. Debayan Bera, Mr. Sakti Prasad Chakrabarti,

¶5

…for the petitioner.

¶6

Mr. Ram Chandra Guchait, Mr. Partha Pratim Roy,

¶7

…for the State.

¶8

Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner be taken on record.

¶9

The report filed by the respondents be also taken on record.

¶10

Heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶11

It is not in dispute that the land acquisition proceeding was initiated under the West Bengal (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 in respect of the petitioner’s land and possession of the land was taken in 1960. Award was prepared and approved by the Collector on 24/9/2002 and declared on 24/10/2002. Admittedly, the petitioner received the award on 28/7/2003.

¶12

The petitioner complains that no notice under Section 12 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (referred to as Act of 1894) was served upon him after the award was determined. The petitioner received the

¶13

¶14

award on protest and subsequently filed an application before the respondent no.3 under Section 18 of the Act of 1894 for reference to Court for determination of the amount of compensation and the like on 6^th August, 2003. Such application is yet to be disposed of.

¶15

It is submitted on behalf of the respondent that in view of the provisions laid down under Section 18 of the Act of 1894, the petitioner is not entitled to file an application for reference to Court after receipt of the compensation amount. There is also nothing to show that such compensation was received on protest. However, it is not denied that the petitioner’s application has not been considered by the authority.

¶16

Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties as well as the material on record, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction upon the respondent no.3 to consider and dispose of the application filed by the petitioner under Section 18 of the Act of 1894 on 6^th August, 2003 after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of communication of this order, in accordance with law.

¶17

With such observation, WPA 4041 of 2019 is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶18

¶19

Since no affidavits are invited, the allegations contained in the petition are deemed not to be admitted.

¶20

Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties on usual undertakings.

¶21

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)

Soumya Kanti Roy v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soumya Kanti Roy v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subhas Patra Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Manju Bera Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Bipad Taran Mondal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Smt Tanima Roy Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Ramananda Chowdhury Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Awadh Narayan Jha Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.