DULAL KAR MODAK Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The land of the petitioner measuring about 0.345 was requisitioned under the Defence of India Act on 27.6.1945 and the possession was taken for the public purpose by the respondents. Subsequently the Defence of India Act having stood repealed, the requisition continued by virtue of the Requisitioned Land (Continuance of Powers) Act, 1947 replacing 1946 Ordinance with the same title. With the enactment of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 the property requisitioned continued under the previous Act was validated by reason of section 3 of the said 1952 Act and the said Requisitioned Land (Continuance of Powers) Act, 1947 was repealed by section 24 thereof. The petitioner contends that no compensation has ever since been paid. Only in 1992 the petitioner was informed that out of the said property 0.434 decimal was released in favour of the petitioner in terms of section 6 of the 1952 Act.

(2.) Mr. Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner contends that this was really a property transaction, inasmuch as, the possession was never handed over to the petitioner but the facts remain that the land is being occupied by squatters. According to him, the possession is to be restored to the petitioner in the position on which the possession was taken at the time of initial requisition. Simple de-requisition or release will not serve the purpose. In such circumstances, he made two alternative prayers (1) that the possession of the property may be given in the same state in which it was taken from the petitioner and (2) compensation for the period during which the petitioner was kept out of possession be calculated and paid to him or alternatively the respondent may acquire the property and pay compensation in accordance with law in case the possession is not possible to be handed over to the petitioner.

(3.) Mr. Dasgupta, learned senior counsel appearing for the State on the other hands points out that the total area of 1.37 acres of land was acquired. Out of the said area being 0.445 was acquired by the respondent. Therefore, the rest of the area either to be released or de-requisitioned or in the alternative it can be acquired.