SRI BIDYAPATI PAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India assailing an order passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal, Second Bench, in the matter of Bidyapati Pal & Ors. Vs. State of W.B. & Ors. [In Re: O.A. No.2936/15 (M.A. 707/15) (LRTT)]. By virtue of the impugned order, the learned Tribunal rejected the miscellaneous application filed under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act in connection with the original application and disposed of the original application also giving liberty to prefer an appeal before the statutory authority. There was a further direction upon the statutory authority that in the event there is delay in preferring the above appeal it should be dealt with liberally by the concerned statutory appellate authority in view of several judgments in this regard by the Honourable Apex Court. The impugned order of the learned Tribunal was based on a finding that the applicant had not availed of any remedial measure available to them under the relevant specified Act as contained in Sec. 10(3)(a) of the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the WBLRTT Act, 1997).

(2.) On a previous occasion the respondent No.2 after considering the statutory appeal of the petitioners arising out of an order passed by the respondent No.3 arrived at a conclusion in connection with a representation/application of the petitioners for making necessary correction in the record of rights under reference that, according to the Forest Department it was a settled principles of law that mere entry in the record of rights does not confer any title unless its foundation was established whereas no documentary evidence like copy of notification of the forest or protected forest etc. from the side of the Forest Department was produced, the entry made in the record of rights was not eligible to be considered its value.

(3.) After above observation, the respondent No.2 quashed and set aside the earlier order of the respondent No.3 with a direction upon him to enquire the land locality and to determine who was in possession in the land in question for the purpose of disposal of the representation of the petitioners.