SAMIRAN MONDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Liberty is granted to the learned Advocate for the petitioner to correct the Cause Title. Sri Amal Baran Chatterjee, learned senior Counsel, appears for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is owner of the land in issue in this writ petition. Relying on photographs annexed to the writ petition, Sri Chatterjee argues that the Block Land & Land Reforms Officer, Bankura -II, being the respondent no. 7 in the writ petition, has illegally fixed a Sign Board on the land of the writ petitioner without showing sufficient cause for taking such step. Sri Chatterjee takes this Court to the communication dated 19th of November, 2015 from the Sub -Divisional Land and Land Reforms Officer, Bankura (Sadar) to the writ petitioner calling upon the latter to be present at the hearing. Sri Chatterjee submits that without a decision at the hearing being communicated to the writ petitioner, the unilateral action of occupation of the land in issue by the B.L. & L.R.O. is ex facie bad in law.

(2.) The State is represented by Sri Tapan Kumar Mukherjee, learned Additional Government Pleader, who argues that the issues regarding the vesting of the land is no more res integra before a Writ Court and requires to be agitated before the learned Land Reforms Tribunal. The private respondent no. 9 is represented by Sri Anuruzzaman, learned Advocate. Having heard the parties and considering the materials on record, this Court is at this stage satisfied that the steps taken by the B.L. & L.R.O., if any, with regard to the land in issue cannot overreach any decision at the hearing held by the S.D.L. & L.R.O. vide his communication dated 19th of November, 2015. Therefore, this Court is also prima facie satisfied that there has been a violation of due process in the facts of the present case. Accordingly, learned State Counsel is granted the opportunity to come back with complete instructions on the next date on the decision taken by the S.D.L. & L.R.O. at the hearing scheduled by him on the 3rd of December, 2015 pursuant to his notice dated 19th of November, 2015 (supra).

(3.) The matter is made returnable before the Hon'ble Regular Bench after a period of two weeks from the reopening of the Court post the summer recess of 2016. Till the next date of hearing, there shall be status quo as on date with regard to the land in issue.