NIRMAL KRISHNA DUTTA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present application for writ is directed against a suo moto proceeding and order passed under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976,, hereinafter referred to as the said Act.

(2.) THE subject maters of the said proceeding are premises Nos. 32 and 33 ismail Street within Police Station Entally. The Petitioners claim to be heirs of one Hart Pada Dutta, since decease who is alleged to be lessee with regard to Premises no. 33 and thika tenant with, regard to Premises No. 32, Ismail street. According to the petitioners, Premises No. 33 comprised a tank and a yard along with some structures, constructed by the said Hart Pada Dutta as thika tenant, which were let out to Bharatias the entire area of 32, Ismail street is covered by various structures, save and except the passage for use of such structures. The petitioners further contend that the said Hari Pada dutta had been paying rent to the owners of the said properties viz. Md. Manzoorul Haq, whose father was Moulavi Suvan Ali Khan; that from 1925 till 1964 the petitioners or their predecessor in interest had been paying rent to the owners where after such payment could not be continued due to the owner having become un traced, the petitioners had been continuing to possess the said two premises peacefully realising rents from the sub-tents and carrying on pisciculture in the tank, that on attempted raising of a boundary wall by one emanullah, certain proceedings had to be initiated by petitioners and. on enquiry being made, the petitioners allegedly came to know about purported acquisition of Premises No. 32, Ismail Street and that such acquisition proceeding was initiated at the instance of respondent no. 6, Jana Swastha sahay, with respect to Premises No. 33, Ismail Street under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act and the said Emanullah was authorised to act for the said respondent no. 6. From the xerox copy of a notice it appeared that the said Premises No. 33, Ismail Street had been treated as a vacant land though it was covered fully by structures. It further appeared that the declaration relating to the said land related to the Premises No. 32, Ismail Street and that possession of Premises No. 33 had been handed over to respondent no. 6 through Calcutta Improvement Trust.

(3.) THE petitioners filed an objection under Section 8 of the said Act. canvassing detailed factual position and the reasons as to why the property could not vest under the provisions of the said Act and in pursuance of that objection, the petitioners were given a hearing in course of which entire documentary evidence relating to the said two properties had been produced by the petitioners before the competent Authority. The Petitioners further came to know allegedly that the earlier stages of the proceeding had been completed or carried out upon service of notice on a deceased owner viz. Sovanali Khan, though the name of the petitioners appeared in the assessment record of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation. Under the aforesaid circumstances the petitioners have brought this writ application with prayers for mandates on the respondents to recall or rescind the suo moto proceeding or the orders passed therein as also for quashing of such proceeding and such orders.