Smti. Romila Devi Vs the Andaman and Nicobar Administration — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Smti. Romila Devi Vs the Andaman and Nicobar Administration — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Secretary (Revenue) to decide within three months of communication of the order either to return possession of 0.70 hectares to the petitioners or provide alternate land of equal value, location and importance, hearing the petitioners formally and indicating the proposed land in writing; Deputy Commissioner, South Andaman order dated 30.05.2024 set aside; MES road not to be disturbed or claimed; writ petitions allowed and disposed of without any order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners' 0.70 hectares of land at School Line Village — which the Deputy Commissioner has repeatedly recorded as never acquired — must have its possession returned to the petitioners or be replaced with alternative land of 0.70 hectares. +1 more

Court's answer

This Court directed the Secretary (Revenue) of the Andaman and Nicobar Administration to take a decision — either to return possession of 0.70 hectares of land to the petitioners or to provide them with alternate land of equal value and location — within a period of three months from communication of the order.

Ratio / Principle

The road constructed by the MES shall not be disturbed by the Administration nor claimed by the petitioners.

Key takeaways

The petitioners may be heard formally by the Secretary (Revenue), and the land proposed to be offered to them shall be indicated to them in writing.ratio¶12
The Secretary (Revenue) shall also consider a choice of land of 0.70 hectares that may be requested by the petitioners for being returned to them.ratio¶13
Reiterated: the land to the extent of 0.70 hectares must be of equal value, location and importance.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Calcutta High Court (Circuit Bench at Port Blair), Rajasekhar Mantha, J., November 7, 2024 — adjudicating together WPA/284/2024, WPA/288/2024, WPA/295/2024 and WPA/299/2024 (Romila Devi, Sasikala Devi, Satish Chandra Biswas and Upen Chandra Biswas v. The Andaman and Nicobar Administration). The petitioners, predecessors/successors of recorded owner R.C. Biswas, claim 0.70 hectares at School Line Village near Port Blair airport (Survey No.14/P, mutated in the joint names of Anjana Devi and thirteen others, i.e. the writ petitioners), lying outside a road constructed thereon by the defence establishment (MES) with the petitioners' knowledge. Successive Benches had issued directions (WP No.290 of 2015; MAT/028/2015; WP No.383 of 2016; WP No.092 of 2018; WPA/29/2022), and the Deputy Commissioner, South Andaman had each time gone on record that the land was never acquired. Setting aside the Deputy Commissioner's order dated 30.05.2024, the Court directed the Secretary (Revenue) to decide within three months either to return possession of the 0.70 hectares or to provide alternate land of equal value, location and importance, hearing the petitioners formally, considering their choice of land and indicating the proposal in writing; the MES road is not to be disturbed or claimed. The writ petitions were allowed and disposed of without costs. A contention invoking clause (c) of S.162(c), Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulation, 1966 (extinguishment of tenant right on transfer/letting out in contravention of the Regulation), was canvassed in the submissions.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ]

WPA/284/2024

Smti. Romila Devi

Vs.

The Andaman and Nicobar Administration

With

WPA/288/2024

Sasikala Devi

Vs.

The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others

With

WPA/295/2024

Shri Satish Chandra Biswas

Vs.

The Andaman and Nicobar Administration

With

WPA/299/2024

Shri Upen Chandra Biswas

Vs.

The Andaman and Nicobar Administration

Mr. K. M. B. Jayapal …. for the petitioner

Ms. Babita Das … for the respondents

November 7, 2024 [SR] Item Nos.6,7,8&9

The petitioners’ predecessor one R.C. Biswas is the

recorded owner of area of 0.70 hectares of land at School Line

Village, near Airport at Port Blair. The said land remained out of the lands sold by their predecessor father.

The petitioners claim that they are paying land revenue for the said land for some substantial period of time.

Several rounds of litigation have occurred against the Deputy Commissioner, South Andaman and several directions have been issued by various Benches of this Court, inter alia, in WP No.290 of 2015 dated 24.09.2015, in MAT/028/2015 on 27.11.2015, in WP No.383 of 2016 dated 06.12.2016 in WP No.092 of 2018 by a judgment dated 14.08.2018 and WPA/29/2022 by an order dated 22.04.2022.

Against each of the aforesaid orders, the Deputy Commissioner has consistently replied as follows: - that the land of 0.70 hectares under the Survey No.14/P was mutated in the joint names of Anjana Devi andn 13 others, i.e. the writ petitioners.

The defence establishment has constructed a road on the land in question with the full knowledge of the petitioners and no objection was ever raised.

Reference is made to section 162(c) of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulation, 1966 to argue that the right of tenant has been extinguished under clause (c) when a part of such land has been transferred/let out to use in contravention of the Regulation.

It is also contended that the petitioners did not take steps to reclaim the land on which the road was constructed by the MES.

Admittedly the petitioners are not claiming the land on which the road was constructed. They only claim the remaining areas of 0.70 hectares of land which remains outside the scope of the road construction.

The Deputy Commissioner has gone on record on six occasions that the land was never acquired by the Administration. It would, therefore, normally follow that the possession of the land comprising 0.70 hectares must either be returned to the petitioners or any alternative land of 0.70 hectares must be made available to the petitioners by the Administration and/or the MES.

In view of the above, this Court directs the Secretary (Revenue) of the Andaman and Nicobar Administration to take a decision in the matter i.e., either to return the possession of 0.70 hectares of land to the petitioners or provide them with alternate land of equal value and location within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order.

The road constructed by the MES shall not be disturbed by the Administration or claimed by the petitioners.

The petitioners may be heard formally by the Secretary (Revenue) and the land proposed to be offered to the petitioners shall be indicated to them in writing.

The Secretary (Revenue) shall also consider a choice of land comprising of 0.70 hectares, that may be requested by the petitioners for being returned to them.

It is reiterated that the land to the extent of 0.70 hectares must be of equal value, location and importance.

The order of the Deputy Commissioner, South Andaman dated 30.05.2024 shall stand set side. 16. With the above directions, the writ petition is allowed and disposed of without any order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for,

be given to the parties upon compliance of all formalities.

( Rajasekhar Mantha, J. )