AZAD ALI Vs. LT. GOVERNOR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this writ application has inter alia prayed for the following reliefs:-

(2.) Bereft of all unnecessary details, the fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass. The petitioner is said to have encroached upon a portion of land in the year 1978. Pursuant or in furtherance of a Scheme made by the respondent-Administration, the petitioner filed an application for regularisation of the land allegedly in his possession. The said application was allowed and a licence in order to occupy the land for house site was issued in his favour on 6th July, 1989, as contained in Annexure 'A' to the writ petition; Clause 6 whereof reads thus: "The licence is subject to payment of a premium as may be determine fixed by the Administration". Thereafter, a Press Note, as contained in Annexure 'B' to the writ application, was issued directing all concerned to take steps for getting the lands demarcated and then to deposit the premium. On or about 25th July, 94, a notice was issued to the petitioner that spot inspection/demarcation of the site, allegedly in his possession, would be conducted by Shri Mohendra Roy, Surveyor, Survey Settlement Department, in the petitioner's presence on 26th Aug., 1994, at 10 30 a.m. But the concerned Surveyor, as alleged by the petitioner, did not visit the afore mentioned land in question. On or about 25th Oct., 1994, another notice was issued to the petitioner whereby he was intimated that spot inspection/demarcation would be conducted in the petitioner's presence on 27th Oct., 1994, at 10-00 a.m. It appears from the said notice, which is contained in Annexure- D to the writ application, that the aforementioned land was inspected on 27th Oct., 1994. But the contention of the petitioner, however, is that no demarcation was made by the said Surveyor on that date.

(3.) As no action had been taken by the Respondent-Administration, the petitioner filed an application before the Assistant Commissioner (Survey Settlement), which was received by the said authority on 15th Nov., 1994, requesting him to direct the Tehsildar, Port Blair, to take an action at an early date enabling the petitioner to deposit the premium for the plot in time to the Cashier of the Revenue Department. As no action has been taken in terms of the said application, this writ application has been filed. In this case an affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4, wherein it, inter alia, is contended that the petitioner fraudulently showed the plot of land under his possession to the extent of 284 Sqr. Mtrs. although he had purchased 167 Sqr. Mtrs. of land from another person. It is stated that the petitioner was not entitled to obtain a licence for an area of 200 Sqr. Mtrs. The contentions of the respondents-Administration appear to be that even if a lenient view is taken, the petitioner would only be entitled to obtain a licence to the extent of 33 Sqr. Mtrs. of land.