In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged an order of the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal regarding barga proceedings, alleging non-recording of share. The High Court found no merit in the challenge and dismissed the petition.
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.
09.06.2023 Item No.3 Ct. No.5 CHC (dismissed)
W.P.L.R.T.36 of 2023
Mosiur Rahman Sardar Vs. The State of West Bengal & ors.
Ms. Oindrila Ghosal …for the petitioner
Md. T. M. Siddiqui, Ld. A.G.P. Mr. S. Dhar, Mr. S. Adak
…for the State
An order dated September 27, 2022 passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal is under challenge in the present writ petition.
Bereft of is relevant facts, it appears that, there is an application made by the private respondents for recording of barga in respect of plot of land over which, petitioner claims right, title and interest. According to the petitioner, application for barga was not made over to the petitioner.
It appears from the records that the petitioner made a representation to the concerned Block Land and Land Reforms Officer. Petitioner approached the learned Tribunal with regard to the barga proceeding by way of O.A. No.37 of 2021. Such O.A. was
2
disposed of by the learned Tribunal by permitting the petitioner to file fresh representation claiming share of produce by impleading all recorded bargadars and in the event of death of any bargadar by impleading legal heirs of deceased bargadar and in the event, of the decision in the representation so filed in their favour, the petitioners were given liberty to file second representation for determination of bargadar.
Supplementary affidavit filed in Court be taken on record.
Apparently, petitioner complied with the order passed in O.A.37 of 2021. However, the factum of compliance was not placed before the learned Tribunal when O.A.966 of 2022 was filed and the impugned order obtained thereon.
Be that as it may, petitioner approached the learned Tribunal for the second time by way of O.A.966 of 2022, which was disposed of by the impugned order dated September 27, 2022.
While disposing of the Original Application, the learned Tribunal noted the aforesaid facts. The learned Tribunal also noted that, there was no law empowering the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer concerned to withdraw/rescind/recall the notices issued by him.
3
Learned Tribunal also found it in appropriate to restrain the concerned Block Land and Land Reforms Officer in the manner as sought for by the petitioner.
Barga are yet to be finally decided. Learned Tribunal permitted the disposal thereof. A decision on such proceedings needs to be taken in such proceeding.
In such circumstances, we find no merit in the present application.
W.P.L.R.T. 36 of 2023 is dismissed.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)
(Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the Tribunal's order restraining the Block Officer deserves to be entertained.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mosiur Rahman Sardar
The State of West Bengal
Debangsu Basak
Md. Shabbar Rashidi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
