Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Halima Khatun & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 24 August, 2023
D/L
Item No. 01
24.08.2023
KOLE
FMA 1188 of 2022
With
IA CAN 1 of 2022
Halima Khatun & Ors.
-Vs.-
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. S. P. Lahiri,
Mr. Habibur Rahaman,
... for the appellants.
Mr. Somnath Ganguli, AGP,
Mr. Sukalpa Seal,
.... For the State.
We are told that the appellant no. 1 has passed away
during the pendency of this appeal. We are also told that all
the legal heirs of the appellant no. 1 are on record as
appellants/writ petitioners. Hence, no question of
substitution would arise. Let the name of the first appellant
be struck off from the cause title of the appeal papers.
Learned Advocate for the appellants is granted liberty to
carry out appropriate amendment to the cause title of the
appeal papers.
This is an appeal against a judgment and order dated
June 23, 2022, whereby the writ petition of the appellants
being WPA 14965 of 2018 was dismissed.
The appellants had approached the learned Single
Judge with the grievance that the private respondents as well
as the concerned Panchayat Auhorities were interferring
with peaceful possession and enjoyment of tea garden by the
writ petitioners. The learned Single Judge noted that an
order dated June 19, 2004 has been passed by the West
Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal on transferred
writ petitions being CO 4725(W) of 1994 and CO 4726(W) of
1994. By the said order, the concerned respondent
authorities were directed to hold field enquiry and ascertain
whether or not the land in question is pre-dominantly being
used for the purpose of tea cultivation and if it is found that
the land is being used for tea cultivation, the District Land
and Land Reforms Officer, Uttar Dinajpur would frame
proposals under the appropriate clauses of the West Bengal
Land and Land Reforms Manual, 1991 and in accordance
with the circulars and orders issued, if any, by the State
Government and transmit the same to the State Government
in the Land and Land Reforms Department for consideration
of the proposals for allowing the applicants to retain the land
to the extent in the opinion of the State Government will be
required by the applicants under the proviso to Section 14Y
of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, for the purpose of
running their existing tea garden.
The learned Judge noted that the aforesaid exercise
has yet not been completed. Accordingly, the learned Judge
dismissed the writ petition with the following observations:-
"In view of the aforesaid situation it
appears to this Court that how much land
the petitioners are entitled to retain for tea
cultivation is required to be determined
before considering the grievance as
ventilated by them in the present writ
petition. Therefore, at this stage the present
writ petition cannot be entertained and the
same stands dismissed."
Being aggrieved, the writ petitioners are before us by
way of this appeal.
Learned Advocate for the appellants/writ petitioners
says that the concerned Panchyat is pressurizing the
appellants to attend a 'Salishi'. The Panchayat Authorities
have no jurisdiction or authority to do so. The appellants
apprehend that if the Panchayat Authorities are permitted to
hold such 'Salishi' and if the appellants have to attend the
same, the appellants may be forced to agree to something
that will be against their interest.
From the affidavit of service filed in Court today, it
appears that all the respondents have been served. However,
neither the Panchayat Authorities nor the private
respondents have appeared today.
We find some basis for the grievance of the appellants
if what they say is correct. Nobody has appeared to
controvert the statements and submissions made on behalf
of the appellants.
We are of the view that the administrative head of the
district should look into the matter. Accordingly, we grant
liberty to the appellants to make a fresh comprehensive
representation with supporting documents to District
Magistrate, Uttar Dinajpur, being the respondent no. 2
herein, within a fortnight from date. If such a
representation is made, the respondent no. 2 is directed to
dispose of the same in accordance with law by a reasoned
order, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt
of the representation, after giving an opportunity of hearing
to the appellants herein, the private respondents or their
authorized representatives as also the concerned Panchayat
Authorities. The representation/application that the
appellants will make to the respondent no. 2 will be
accompanied by land schedule of the plots concerned. If the
respondent no. 2 finds substance in the complaint of the
appellants, he will take appropriate remedial measures.
We clarify that we have not gone into the merits of the
case. The respondent no. 2 shall take an informed decision
in accordance with law observing the principles of natural
justice. Needless to say, neither the private respondents nor
the Panchayat Authorities shall take any coercive steps
against the appellants or the land in question, which is
contrary to law.
The order under appeal is set aside.
Since we have not called for affidavits, the allegations
made in the stay application are deemed not to be admitted
by the respondents.
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.)
