JOHRA BIBI Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayers of the petitioner, interalia, are as hereunder.

(2.) Facts which are admitted are enumerated hereinbelow:-

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since notice under Sec. 9 (3B) of the Act of 1894 was not issued, the notice under Sec. 4 (1a) of the Act of 1948 lapsed. The land has already been utilised by the respondents. Therefore it is incumbent upon the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 upon issuance of notice under Sec. 11 of the Act. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the authorities in Vidya Devi v/s. State of Himachal Pradesh and Others reported in (2020) 2 Supreme Court Cases 569, The State of West Bengal and Others v/s. Ganesh Samanta reported in (2014) 4 WBLR (Cal) 996 and State of West Bengal and Others v/s. Aziman Bibi and Others reported in (2016) 15 Supreme Court Cases 710 in support of his contention.