INDUPROVA MITRA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question involved in this case is, whether a tank is to be treated as a 'vacant land' within its meaning as given in the urban Land (Ceiling and Regulations) Act, 1976.

(2.) SHORN of all details, the facts as stated by the writ petitioner in the writ application inter alia, are that the original writ petitioner Induprova Mitra, since deceased, owned the properties as described in paragraph 2 of the writ application namely, premises No. 22,tantibaganlane, Calcutta, 2/4, Chrispher road, Calcutta, 24, Gorachand Road, Calcutta, 12/c, Chakraberia Lane, calcutta and 30, Masjid Bary Bye Lane, now known as 34, Bediadanga Bye lane, Calcutta, together with a tank in the said premises No. 34, Bediadanga bye Lane. According to the petitioner, though she had filed statement under section 6 (i) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulations) Act, 1976, such statement was filed under misconception of law since the original writ petitioner did not hold any excess vacant land, but the competent authority held that the petitioner owned 3,846. 18 sq. metre of excess vacant land and that was to be vested to the State and accordingly, a draft statement was published by the competent authority (Annexure "a" to the writ application ).

(3.) IT is contended by Dr. Mukherjee, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, that the tank situated at premises No. 34, bediadanga Bye Lane, cannot be treated to be a vacant land, and if the area of the said tank is excluded, the petitioner cannot be held to be owing and/or possessing any excess vacant land as per the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulations) Act, 1976. Dr. Mukherjee further contends that 'vacant land' within its meaning as given in the aforesaid Act, means land on which structure is permissible and / or is possible. Since no structure or building cannot be constructed on a tank as it is, without first of all covering and/or filling it up, the tank as it is cannot be said to be Vacant land' so as to bring it within the purview of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulations) Act, 1976 even if there is no specific rule or restriction made and/or imposed in any municipal Act or Regulation regarding construction of any building or structure, on a tank. In support of his contentions ). Dr. Mukherjee refers to the division Bench judgment of this Hon'ble Court in Shila Moitra's case reported in 1981 (1) C. L. J. 148 and also to the provisions of the Calcutta Municipal Act. 1951 and the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 and contends inter alia that automatically, a tank cannot be used as building site, without being filled up.