Kazi Taiyeb Ali vs The State Of West Bengal And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 3076 Cal

42   07.06.             IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
     2022                     Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
                                      Appellate Side.
     Ct. No. 04
                                          -----------

Ab

WPLRT 39 of 2022

Kazi Taiyeb Ali Vs.

The State of West Bengal and others.

---------------

Mr. Mrinal Kanti Ghosh.

... for the petitioner.

Mr. Chandi Charan De, Mr. Soumitro Bandyopadhyay, Mr. Aniruddha Sen.

... for the State.

The affidavit of service filed in Court today is kept with the record.

Despite service there is no representation on behalf of the contesting respondents.

The instant writ petition is filed challenging a judgment dated 24th February 2022 passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal in OA 1102 of 2016 (LRTT) whereby and whereunder the said tribunal application was dismissed on contest. The dispute pertains to the right, title and interest in respect of RS Plot No. 250. Previously, a suit was filed before the civil Court and the appellate Court modified the decree to the extent that the petitioner is having undivided 2/3rd share in respect of the said plot of land and is in actual possession of the suit property and restrained the defendants therein from creating any disturbances to such possession until the partition is effected by metes and bounds. It appears that several litigation started between the parties in relation to the

record of rights and ultimately the tribunal has rejected the said application on the ground that the concerned officer is obliged to look into the documents before the mutation is effected and once having noticed such, it is not proper to interfere with the said order. It is stated in the instant application that taking advantage of dismissal of the tribunal application, the private respondents are trying to interfere with the possession, which had already been confirmed in the judgment and decree passed by the appellate Court. Since the possession can only be taken through recourse to law, nobody shall be allowed to take the law in his own hand and take the possession forcibly. We think that a prima facie case is made out. Accordingly, the respondent nos. 5 to 12 are restrained from interfering with the possession of the petitioner in respect of RS Plot No. 250 for a period of eight weeks from date or until further order/orders of this Court, whichever is earlier. The respondents are directed to file affidavit-in- opposition to the writ petition within four weeks from date; reply thereto, if any, shall be filed within a week thereafter and the writ petition is made returnable after five weeks.

The learned Advocate for the petitioner is directed to communicate this order to the respondent nos. 5 to 12 by speed post and shall file affidavit of service on the returnable date.

(Harish Tandon, J.)

(Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.)