DEBRANJAN BISWAS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this application, the applicant has challenged the order of the Tribunal dated 12th May, 2004 whereby and whereunder the petitioner's application being o. A. No. 653 of 2003 has been dismissed. Before the Tribunal, the petitioner challenged the order of the Revenue Officer who refused to accept the case of the petitioner that he has filed return in B Form under the West Bengal Estates acquisition Act, 1953. Consequently order of vesting passed earlier was affirmed and retained and the case was not reopened at all.

(2.) ACCORDING to the applicants before us, on commencement of the West bengal Estates Acquisition Act by operation of the law, vesting took place in case of excess land beyond the ceiling limit fixed under the aforesaid statute. In terms of the aforesaid Act, intermediary was supposed to file return in prescribed B Form. According to the petitioner, the vesting order was passed against the dead person. Initially no return was filed as the petitioner contends that the petitioner is entitled to retain his land within ceiling limit. A civil suit was filed before the learned Munsif having jurisdiction over the matter, suit was dismissed and against the order of dismissal an appeal was preferred before the appropriate Court, viz. the learned District Judge. The learned District judge allowed the appeal and set aside order of the learned Munsif. The operative portion of the judgment and order of the learned District Judge set out herein, "that the appeal b'e and the same is allowed on contest but without cost. The judgment and decree passed by the learned Munsif are hereby set aside in its entirety. It is hereby declared that the plaintiffs/ appellants have right to retain the suit properties by submission of return in B Form before the revenue Officer which they should do as early as possible, so long they do not part with the possession of the suit lands Revenue Officer shall give the appellants the opportunity of being heard after such submission of return in B form by the appellants and he shall thereafter proceed in accordance with law with the said return in B Form submitted by the appellants. The aforesaid judgment and decree was passed in or about 19th August, 1985. "

(3.) THEREAFTER the appellant filed return in B Form on 21st February, 1986. In spite of submission of the said return in B Form, the Revenue Officer did not proceed with the matter.