Monirul Khan & Anr vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 4657 Cal

   D/L
Item No. 07
02.08.2023
 KOLE
                               MAT 846 of 2023
                                    With
                             IA No. CAN 1 of 2023

                            Monirul Khan & Anr.
                                    -Vs.-
                       The State of West Bengal & Ors.


              Mr. Sanjib Kumar Mal,
              Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee,
              Mr. Ankan Das,
                                                        ... for the appellants.

              Mr. Rajarshi Basu,
              Mr. K. M. Hossain,
                                                              ... for the State.

              Mr. Kushal Chatterjee,
              Mr. T. Khan,
              Mr. D. Choudhury,
              Mr. S. Mitra,
                                           ... for the respondent nos. 9 to 14.

By consent of the parties, the appeal and the

connected application are taken up for hearing together.

Affidavit of service filed in court today be kept with

the records. Only the State and the private respondents are

represented. In spite of notice, the concerned Panchayat

Samity is not represented. However, in view of the nature of

the order that we propose to pass, we do not deem it

necessary to defer hearing of the appeal and the application.

A judgment and order dated May 2, 2023, whereby

the writ petition of the appellants being WPA 9425 of 2023

was disposed of, is under challenge in this appeal.

The appellants had approached the learned Single

Judge with the grievance that the private respondents had

made construction on plot nos. 2451, 2479, 2494 and 2495 of

Mouza-Keshabpur, without obtaining sanctioned building

plan. The other issue raised was that construction had been

made by the private respondents on plot no 2496 which is

classified as 'pukur'.

The learned Judge, after hearing learned Advocates

for the writ petitioners, the State, Howrah Zilla Parishad and

the private respondents, disposed of the writ petition with

the following directions:-

"The petitioner is at liberty to approach the appropriate permission granting authority seeking information as to whether any construction had been permitted on Plot No. 2496 to any person or not. Upon the reply that shall be given by the authority, the petitioner will be at liberty to take appropriate steps.

The subsequent contention of the petitioner, from the bar, that the plan was procured after the construction has been made, is outside the scope of the writ petition and the petitioner is at liberty to approach the appropriate forum for appropriate remedy."

Being aggrieved, the writ petitioners have come up by

way of this appeal.

We have heard learned Counsel for the parties at

some length. We are of the view that the grievance of the

writ petitioners may be redressed by the concerned officers

in the administration.

We find from the records that representations have

been made by the appellants/writ petitioners to the

Additional District Magistrate, Sabhapati of Domjur

Panchayat Samity, Pradhan of Begri Gram Panchat, the

concerned Block Development Officer etc.. However, we are

of the view that fresh comprehensive representations should

be made by the appellants before the concerned authorities.

Accordingly, we grant liberty to the appellants to

make fresh representation as regards the issue of conversion

of the concerned plot of land before the concerned authority

within three weeks from date with copy to the private

respondents. If such a representation is made, the

competent authority shall dispose of such representation, in

accordance with law, by a reasoned order, within a period of

eight weeks from the date of receipt of the representation,

after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellants, the

private respondents, any other concerned party or their

authorized representatives. The order so passed, shall be

communicated to the parties within a week from the date of

the order. Needless to say that if the competent authority

finds any infraction of law on the part of the private

respondents, necessary action will be taken by the authority

in accordance with law.

In so far as the issue of alleged unauthorized

construction is concerned, the appellants will be at liberty to

make a comprehensive representation to the concerned

authority within three weeks from date, with a copy to the

private respondents. If such a representation is made, the

competent authority shall dispose of such representation, in

accordance with law, by a reasoned order, within a period of

eight weeks from the date of receipt of the representation,

after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellants, the

private respondents, any other concerned party or their

authorized representatives. The order so passed, shall be

communicated to the parties within a week from the date of

the order. Needless to say that if the competent authority

finds merit in the complaint of the appellants, necessary

remedial action will be taken by the authority against the

private respondents in accordance with law.

We make it clear that we have not gone into the

merits of the disputes between the parties. The competent

authorities referred to above shall decide the representations

of the appellants, if made within the time period prescribed

without being influenced by any observation in the order of

the learned Single Judge which is impugned before us or in

our order.

Since we have not called for affidavits, the allegations

made in the stay application are deemed not to be admitted

by the respondents.

The order impugned before us is modified to the

aforesaid extent.

The appeal and the connected application are,

accordingly, disposed of.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be

supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.

(Arijit Banerjee, J.)

(Apurba Sinha Ray, J.)