(1.) THE petitioner company was granted a lease for 999 years in respect of certain plots of forest land including c. s. plots nos. 12 and 56, in mouza Kanksa J. L. No. 86, district Burdwan, by a Debatter estate known as "ukhara Estate Debattar". under a deed of lease dated February 20, 1954. The genuineness and validity of the document of lease was, the petitioner company says. upheld in a proceeding under section 5 (A) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act and the petitioner company was also recorded as "dakhalkar" in respect of the leasehold plots in the settlement records prepared under the said Act. The petitioner company further says that the leasehold plots were covered by a working plan prepared under the West Bengal Private Forest Act and the petitioner was working the forest in accordance with the plan. This is, however, not wholly admitted by the respondent no. 3, the Forest Range Officer, who states in his affidavit-in-opposition as hereinafter stated : -
(2.) THE allegations in the affidavit-in -opposition are denied in the affidavitin-reply and in paragraph 5 of the affidavit-in-reply it is stated as follows : -
(3.) CONSIDERING the avernments made in the affidavit-in-reply and the materials therein disclosed, it is impossible for me to hold that the forest department was not even aware of the existence of the petitioner company working in the forest. Paragraph 6 of the affidavit-in-opposition by the Forest Range officer must, therefore, be treated as containing an exaggeration and I leave the disputed question at that, because it is not necessary for me to go further into the point. The petitioner company feels aggrieved by an order under section 10 (2) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, made by the respondent no. 1, Sub-Divisional Land Reforms Officer, a copy of which was served on the petitioner company on May 5, 1952. The material portion of the said order reads as follows: -