Allowed

Samiran Goswami v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC14 Jul 2022WPA/1603/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court found that the Special Land Acquisition Officer quashed his own order rejecting a compensation claim for lack of reasoning. It remitted the matter to a Screening Committee to pass a speaking order after hearing the petitioner within one month.

What did the court decide?

The order rejecting the petitioner's prayer is set aside; the matter is remanded to the Special Land Acquisition Officer to place it before the Screening Committee for a reasoned order within one mont

Samiran Goswami Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

19 jdt.

¶2

14.07.2022 jb.

¶3

W.P.A. 1603 of 2022 (Samiran Goswami vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.)

¶4

Mr. Sougata Mitra Ms. Ankita Dey …. For the Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Susovan Sengupta Mr. Subir Pal …. For the State

¶6

The order passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Purulia on 25^th February, 2014 rejecting the claim of the petitioner is under challenge in the writ petition.

¶7

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the order impugned is a short and cryptic order which was made without considering the submission made on behalf of the petitioner and without assigning any reason for rejection of his prayer.

¶8

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the order impugned cannot be interfered with as it has been passed in consonance with the notification issued by the Government of West Bengal, Labour Department on 21^st August, 2002.

¶9

¶10

Bare perusal of the order impugned dated 25^th February, 2014 demonstrates that the inference arrived at by the Authority has been recorded in the order without assigning any reason for drawing such inference. The order only says that the petitioner’s prayer has been rejected as the petitioner’s case is not covered under Clause 3 of the notification. The order is silent as to what prompted the Authority to arrive at such a conclusion.

¶11

In view of the same, the order impugned is required to be set aside and the Authority be directed to reconsider the prayer of the petitioner in accordance with law. Accordingly the order passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer vide Memo No. 231(18)/L.A. dated 25^th February, 2014 is set aside/quashed.

¶12

The Special Land Acquisition Officer, being the third respondent herein, is directed to place the matter before the Screening Committee for reconsideration of the same upon giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in accordance with law. The Screening Committee should pass a speaking order assigning reasons for arriving at the conclusion. The entire exercise should be completed within one month from the date of communication of this order.

¶13

W.P.A. 1603 of 2022 is thus disposed of.

¶14

¶15

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶16

Since no affidavit has been invited, allegations contained in the writ petition shall be deemed not to have been admitted.

¶17

Urgent certified website copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of requisite formalities.

¶18

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)

Samiran Goswami v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samiran Goswami v. State of West Bengal and 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

Hazira Khatun Bibi Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Trideb Ranjan Maity Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sk. Ruhul Amin Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

F.C.I. Workers Union Vs Surender Singh Taxak and Ors.

Ravindra Singh Rathore and Others Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Vivekananda Seva Samity and Others Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.