Sri Pranab Chakraborty & Ors vs State Of West Bengal & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 597 Cal

16.02.2022
rc/ct.no.10
Item No.06&07


                           WPA No. 12926 of 2021
                       Sri Pranab Chakraborty & Ors.
                                   Versus
                        State of West Bengal & Ors.
                                    And
                           WPA No. 15297 of 2021
                     Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
                                   Versus
                        State of West Bengal & Ors.



                Mr. Tapan Kumar Rakshit
                Mr. Surojit Roy
                                     ..for the petitioner in WPA No.
                                          12926     of    2021/for    the
                                          respondents no. 5 to 11 in WPA

15297 of 2021

Mr. Puspendu Chakraborty ...for the petitioner in WPA 15297 of 2021/ for the BPCL in WPA No. 12926 of 2021

Mr. Anirban Ray, Ld. GP Mr. Susovan Sengupta Mr. M.K.Sadhu .. for the State WPA No. 12926 of 2021

Mr. Soumitra Bandyopadhyay Mr. Priyabrata Batabyal ... for the State WPA 15297 of 2021

The written notes of submission filed by the learned

counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in WPA No.

12926 of 2021 is taken on record.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

petitioners in WPA No. 12926 of 2021 has placed reliance

on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India

passed by the three Judges' Bench in Union of India &

Anr. Vs. Pradeep Kumari & Ors. reported in AIR 1995

Supreme Court, Page 2259 and has submitted that the

judgment in Babua Ram & Ors. Vs. State of UP & Anr.

reported in (1995) 2 Supreme Court Cases 689 has been

overruled by the larger Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court of India.

The relevant portion of the judgment in Union of

India & Anr. (supra) is set out herein.

"13. We are, therefore, unable to agree with the

view expressed in Babua Ram (1995 AIR SCW 65)

(supra) and Karnail Sigh (1995(1) SCALE 21) (supra)

that application under Section 28-A for

redetermination of compensation can only be made on

the basis of the first award that is made after the

coming into force of Section 28-A. In our opinion, the

benefit of re-determination of amount of compensation

under Section 28-A can be availed of on the basis of

any one of the awards that has been made by the

Court after the coming into force of Section 28-A

provided the applicant seeking such benefit makes

the application under Section 28-A within the

prescribed period of three months from the making of

the award on the basis of which re-determination is

sought. The first contention urged by Shri Goswamy

in support of the Review petitions is, therefore,

rejected."

It transpires from the said interpretation of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that the view expressed in

Babua Ram (supra) with regard to re-determination of

compensation under Section 28-A was not accepted by the

larger Bench. The larger Bench has not overruled the

judgment of Babua Ram (supra) in its entirety and only a

particular aspect of the judgment was dealt with.

In the order dated February 02, 2022, this Court

held that in view of pendency of the appeal before the

Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court against an order

passed by the Collector in the case of Sayeeful Islam who

stands on the same footing as the petitioners in the

present writ petition, the order impugned passed with

regard to the present writ petitioners should be kept

pending, awaiting the decision of the Hon'ble Division

Bench. The relevant portion quoted from Babua Ram

(supra) in the said order has not been considered by the

larger Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court which has only

dealt with a particular issue in the said judgment.

The entire judgment in Babua Ram (supra) not

being overruled by the larger Bench, review of the order

dated February 02, 2022 on that ground is not called for.

(Suvra Ghosh,J)