Anjali Singh (Das) Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Anjali Singh (Das) Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2 to consider the representation dated 18.02.2025 in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner and respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and/or their authorized representatives, to pass a reasoned order in writing and communicate it to the writ petitioner and respondent Nos. 4 and 5, the entire exercise to be completed within three months from communication of the order; respondent No. 2 to act on the server copy.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent No. 2 authority ought to be directed to consider the writ petitioner's representation dated 18.02.2025, praying for disbursement of compensation for the alleged acquisition of her land and pond at Mouza Parasia, P.S. Jamaria, District Burdwan, in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing.

Court's answer

This Court directed the respondent No. 2/authority to consider the writ petitioner's representation dated 18.02.2025 in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner as well as to respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and/or their authorized representatives, and thereafter to pass a reasoned order in writing and communicate such order to the writ petitioner as well as to respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

Ratio / Principle

The entire exercise of considering the representation and passing and communicating the reasoned order is to be completed within three months from the date of communication of this order.

Key takeaways

The respondent No. 2 is directed to act on the server copy of this order, and liberty was given to the learned Advocate for the writ petitioner to communicate the server copy to respondent No. 2 forthwith.ratio¶5

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WPA 5966 of 2025, decided on 02.04.2025 (Partha Sarathi Sen, J.) — Smt. Anjali Singh (Das) v. The State of West Bengal & Ors. The writ petitioner, aggrieved by non-consideration of her prayer for disbursement of compensation for the alleged acquisition of her property (Plot No. 1006 measuring 39 decimal, Plot No. 1007 measuring 97 decimal, Plot No. 1009 measuring 12 decimal and Plot No. 1012 measuring 8 decimal of pond, of total 7305 decimal of agricultural land and 2 decimal pond) at Mouza Parasia, P.S. Jamaria, District Burdwan, had submitted a representation/letter dated 18.02.2025 to respondent Nos. 2 and 3, upon which respondent No. 2 had taken no action. Disposing of the writ petition, the Court directed respondent No. 2 to consider the representation dated 18.02.2025 in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner as well as respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and/or their authorized representatives, to pass a reasoned order in writing and communicate it to the writ petitioner and respondent Nos. 4 and 5, completing the entire exercise within three months from the date of communication of the order; respondent No. 2 was directed to act on the server copy of the order.

S/L 5 02.04.2025 Court. No. 236 Suvayan

WPA 5966 of 2025

Smt. Anjali Singh (Das) Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Aditya Sen

…for the petitioner.

Mr. Chandi Charan De, AGP Mr. Anirban Sarkar

…for the State.

Upon hearing learned Advocate for the writ petitioner and learned Advocate for the State it reveals to this Court that the writ petitioner is aggrieved for nonconsideration of his prayer for disbursement of compensation for the alleged acquisition of her property situated at Plot No. 1006 measuring 39 decimal of land, Plot No. 1007 measuring 97 decimal of land, Plot No. 1009 measuring 12 decimal of land and Plot No. 1012 measuring 8 decimal of pond of total 7305 decimal of agricultural land and 2 decimal pond being situated at Mouza – Parasia, P.S. – Jamaria, District – Burdwan, PIN – 713321.

In course of hearing learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner at very outset draws attention of this Court to page No. 70 of the writ petition being a copy of the letter dated 18.02.2025 as written by the writ petitioner to the respondent No. 2 as well as to respondent No. 3. It is submitted that despite submission of such representation the

2

respondent No. 2/authority had paid no heed to such representation and practically did nothing.

In view of such, while disposing the instant writ petition this Court directs the respondent No. 2/authority to consider the representation dated 18.02.2025 as submitted by the writ petitioner in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner as well as to the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and/or their authorized representatives and thereafter to pass a reasoned order in writing and shall communicate such order to the writ petitioner as well as to the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 forthwith.

It is made clear that the entire exercise as indicated hereinabove is to be completed within three months from the date of communication of this order.

The respondent No. 2 is directed to act on the server copy of this order.

Liberty is given to the learned Advocate for the writ petitioner to communicate the server copy of the instant order to the respondent No. 2 forthwith.

With the aforementioned observation, the instant writ petition being WPA 5966 of 2025 is disposed of.

Urgent Xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all necessary formalities.

(Partha Sarathi Sen, J.)