Sk Arfan and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Sk Arfan and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with directions to the B.L. & L.R.O.: (i) resolve the issue raised by the parties by a reasoned order after hearing all interested persons; (ii) the issue may be decided in any one of the two pending proceedings (Misc. Case No. 186 of 2021 or Misc. Case No. 35 of 2022) and the other dropped; (iii) the reasoned decision to be communicated to the parties; (iv) completion within 8 weeks from receipt of the order; and (v) parties to maintain status quo as to nature, character and possession of the lands until the decision is taken and communicated. No order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order of the learned Tribunal in OA 2143 of 2022, directing the B.L. & L.R.O. to dispose of Misc. Case No. 35 of 2022 within a specific time frame, was sustainable when another proceeding (Misc. Case No. 186 of 2021) on the same cause of action and relief was already pending. +1 more

Court's answer

From the contentions of the respective parties it was apparent that two proceedings were pending before the B.L. & L.R.O. on the same issue.

Ratio / Principle

The B.L. & L.R.O. was directed to resolve the issue raised by the parties by issuing a reasoned order after affording an opportunity of hearing to all interested persons, and to communicate the reasoned decision to them.

Key takeaways

The B.L. & L.R.O. may decide the issue in any one of the two proceedings and drop the other.ratio¶19
The entire exercise was to be completed within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order.ratio¶20
Until the B.L. & L.R.O.'s decision is taken and communicated to the parties, the parties shall maintain status quo with regard to the nature, character and possession of the lands in question.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WPLRT 28 of 2024) against the learned Tribunal's order dated 19.12.2023 in OA 2143 of 2022, by which the Tribunal directed the B.L. & L.R.O. to dispose of Misc. Case No. 35 of 2022 (arising from a manual application under S. 50(1)(f) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 for correction of record of rights) within a time frame, even though Misc. Case No. 186 of 2021 (arising from an e-Bhumi portal application under S. 50(1)) on the same cause of action and relief was already pending. Held: it was apparent that two proceedings on the same issue were pending before the B.L. & L.R.O.; the B.L. & L.R.O. was directed to resolve the issue by a reasoned order after affording hearing to all interested persons and to communicate the decision; it may decide the issue in any one of the proceedings and drop the other; the entire exercise to be completed within 8 weeks of receipt of the order; parties to maintain status quo as to the nature, character and possession of the lands until the decision is taken and communicated. Petition disposed of; no order as to costs.

5 30.07.2024 Ct. No. 11 rrc

WPLRT 28 of 2024 (Sk Arfan & Anr. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.)

Mr. Dinesh Pani

…. For the petitioners

Mr. Supratim Dhar Mr. Amritlal Chatterjee

….. For the State

Mr. Mrinal Kanti Ghosh Mr. Saunak Mandal Mr. Jayanta Dey

….. For the respondent no. 4

Throwing a challenge to the justifiability of the order dated 19^th December, 2023 passed by the learned Tribunal in the Original Application (in short, OA), being OA 2143 of 2022, the present writ petition has been instituted.

Mr. Pani, learned advocate representing the petitioners, submits that based on an application made by the private respondent, a proceeding vide. Misc. Case No. 186 of 2021, was initiated under Section 50(1) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'). Subsequently, the private respondent filed another application on the same cause of action and seeking the same relief. Despite the fact that a proceeding on the same issue was already pending, the B.L.&L.R.O. started a new proceeding, being as Misc. Case No. 35 of 2022.

He further contends that the pendency of two proceedings on the same issue was brought to the attention of the learned Tribunal, but the Learned Tribunal glossed over the same.

2

Instead, by the order currently under scrutiny in this writ petition, the Tribunal directed the B.L. & L.R.O. to dispose of Misc. Case No. 35 of 2022 within a specific time frame. According to him, such a directive from the learned Tribunal cannot be sustained.

Mr. Dhar, learned advocate, representing the State respondents, submits that initially, the private respondent sought for rectification of record of rights through newly introduced e-Bhumi portal and based on this online application, the Misc. case no. 186 of 2021 was initiated. Subsequently, the private respondent submitted a manual application under Section 50(1)(f) of the 1955 Act for correction of record of rights, which led to initiation of a subsequent proceeding, being Misc. case no. 35 of 2002.

Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate, representing the private respondent, submits that the private respondent is only interested in rectification of record of rights and that may be done in any of the proceedings. He urges that a direction be given to resolve the issue raised by the private respondent. He submits that if the issue is resolved in the first proceeding, there shall be no need to pass any order in the subsequent proceeding.

Heard the learned advocates, appearing for the respective parties and perused the materials on record.

However, from the contentions canvassed by the respective parties, it is apparent that two proceedings are pending before the B.L. & L.R.O. on the same issue. In view thereof, the B.L. & L.R.O. is directed to resolve the issue raised by the parties by issuing a reasoned order, after affording an opportunity for

3

hearing to all interested persons. The reasoned decision shall be communicated to them. The B.L. & L.R.O. may decide the issue in any one of the proceedings and drop the other.

The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 8 (eight) weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

Until such decision is taken by the B.L. & L.R.O. and the same is communicated to the parties, the parties shall maintain status quo with regard to the nature, character and possession of the lands in question.

With these observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)