Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Nakul Chandra Jana vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 31 January, 2022
31.01.2022
Item No. 17
Court No.6.
S. De
Through Video Conference
M.A.T. 13 of 2022
I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2022
Nakul Chandra Jana.
Vs
State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Bharat Chandra Simai,
...for the appellant.
Mr. Saptarshi Kr. Mal,
...for the private respondents.
By consent of the parties the appeal and the
connected application are taken up together for
hearing.
This appeal is directed against a judgment and
order dated December 14, 2021 whereby WPA No.2265
of 2020 was dismissed by the learned Single Judge
with liberty to the petitioner to approach the
competent Civil Court canvassing the civil rights of the
parties as averred in the writ petition and/or the
competent authority in the event the petitioner alleges
that the construction raised by the private
respondents are unauthorized and without
permission.
The writ petitioner/appellant approached the
learned Single Judge with the grievance that the
private respondents have encroached upon public
property and have made construction thereon which
has led to blocking the ingress to and egress from the
writ petitioner's property. The learned Judge was of
the view that the dispute between the writ petitioner
and the private respondents being of a private and civil
in nature, the writ petition is not maintainable.
However, we find that one of the allegations of
the writ petitioner is that the private respondents have
encroached upon and made unauthorized construction
on Government land. The writ petitioner appears to
have made a representation dated January 3, 2020 to
the Sub-Divisional Officer, Tamluk, Purba Medinipur,
who, the writ petitioner says, is the competent
authority to consider the petitioner's grievance under
the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized
Occupants) Act, 1971. The writ petitioner/appellant
says that no action has been taken by the Sub-
Divisional Officer on the basis of such representation
and the representation has not been considered at all.
We are in agreement with the learned Single
Judge that the civil dispute between the writ petitioner
and the private respondents could not have been made
subject matter of the writ petition. However, we are of
the view that to the extent the writ petitioner's
grievance is that the private respondents have
encroached upon public property, the writ petitioner
may ventilate such grievance before the appropriate
authority under the 1971 Act who should consider
such grievance and take a decision thereon.
Accordingly, we dispose of this appeal and the
connected application by directing the Sub-Divisional
Officer, Tamluk, Purba Medinipur, to consider the writ
petitioner/appellant's representation dated January 3,
2020 (annexure P-11 to the Stay Application) and take
a reasoned decision thereon in accordance with law
within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of this order, after giving an opportunity of
hearing to the writ petitioner/appellant, the private
respondents and any other party who may be affected
by the decision taken on the writ petitioner/appellant's
representation. Needless to say that if the officer who
is respondent no.3 herein, finds that there is
substance in the complaint of the writ
petitioner/appellant, appropriate remedial measures
will be taken by him immediately.
The order under appeal is modified to the above
extent.
Since we have not called for affidavits, the
allegations contained in the stay petition are deemed
not to be admitted by the respondents.
Accordingly, the appeal being MAT 13 of 2022 is
disposed of along with the connected application being
I.A. CAN 1 of 2022.
Urgent certified photostat copy of this order, if
applied for, shall be given to the parties as
expeditiously as possible on compliance with all the
necessary formalities.
(Kausik Chanda, J.) (Arijit Banerjee, J.)
