STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs. ANIL RATAN BANERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has arisen out of the order dated July 6, 2004 passed by one of the learned Judges of this Court in C.R. No. 14209(W) of 1988 whereby the learned Judge allowed the writ petition thereby directing the Competent Authority under the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 to restart the proceedings from the stage of Sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Act treating the writ petitioners as the owners of the property referred to in the writ petition and also directing to take all the subsequent steps from the stage of Sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Act upon notice to the writ petitioners. Being aggrieved, the State-respondent has preferred this appeal.

(2.) The brief fact necessary to unfold the issues involved in the writ petition is that according to the Writ-Petitioners, one D.R. Karnani purchased land measuring 3 Bighas 7 Cottahas 9 Chittacks and 5 Square feet with structures thereon at premises No. 113/12, Diamond Harbour Road, Behala in 1966 and then he constructed several residential units at the said premises and those constructions were duly recorded with the concerned municipal authority in 1973-74. Thereafter the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 (henceforth shall be called as the Act) came into force in February, 1976. The said Karnani entered into an agreement for development of the said property with one Milan Tritha Samabay Abasan Samity Limited and/or one N. Chakraberty. But the said agreement was cancelled subsequently. On the basis of a complaint, a spot enquiry was held without giving any notice to the said Karnani. Thereafter, the said Karnani sent notice under Section 26 of the said Act for permission to transfer the said land with building structures but the appellant did not give any reply to such notice. Then as per the then existing Rule after expiry of 60 days, the deeming Clause came into force. Thereafter, an agreement for sale was made between D.R. Karnani and the writ petitioner No. 12 and in part performance of such agreement for sale, the writ petitioner No. 12 came into possession of the entire property on April 19, 1985. On May 4, 1985 permission to construct buildings was recorded by the State of West Bengal under the Town & Country Planning Act, 1979 on the said property. The appellant issued 'no objection certificate' on June 15, 1985. The writ petitioner No. 12 intimated the appellant on November 9, 1985 to the effect that they were in possession of the said property but no reply was given. Then, on May 14, 1987, a decree for specific performance was passed by the competent court against Karnani. Thereafter on July 8, 1987, several Deeds of Conveyance were executed by the Assistant District Judge in favour of the writ petitioner No. 12 who, however, registered a Deeds of Release in favour of the writ petitioner Nos. 1 to 11 and those Deeds of Release were registered on April 26, 1988 reflecting thereby the permission to transfer under Section 27 of the said Act.

(3.) Then in September, 1987 the writ petitioners intimated the Competent Authority that the property in question was held by 12 separate persons and not by Mr. D.R. Karnani. The writ petitioners were entitled to get notice under Rules 5 and 6 of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Rules, 1976. But the writ petitioners were not given any notice of the final statement prepared by the Competent Authority under the provisions of the said Act. Even no notice was served upon D.R. Karnani. In fact, Karnani became disinterested in the property in question after sale. The writ petitioner No. 12 filed representations to the appellant in vain and then in 1988 the writ petitioners filed the writ petition challenging the action of the appellants and got interim order of injunction. During pendency of the said writ petition, the appellants granted 'no objection certificate' for grant of sanction of the building plan. The learned Single Judge disposed of the said writ petition by the impugned judgment and order. Thereafter, the writ petitioners filed one review application and that review application was disposed of subsequently. Sylvia Properties Private Limited and others filed another writ petition bearing number W.P.1883 of 2004 against the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and the competent authorities under the said Act against the action of the corporation and the authorities at the instance of some interested persons. That writ petition was disposed of on July 6, 2005 and the appeal thereof filed by the Competent Authority against the order dated July 6, 2005 in W.P. No. 1883 of 2004 is still pending.