RANIBALA BHARS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the opposite parties to forbear from giving effect to a declaration made under the provisions of section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 and directing the opposite parties Nos. 1 to 3 to cancel the said declaration and the notices for giving delivery of possession, which were served on the petitioners.

(2.) THE petitioners are lessees under the respondents Nos. 5 to 10 and they carry on business of brick manufacturing in the village of Mahesh at Serampore in the district of Hooghly. It is alleged that the said business is being carried on by the petitioners and their predecessors-in-interest for over 50 years. On the 30th of October, 1948 respondent No. 4, The Bengal Luxmi Cotton Mills Ltd. , sent a requisition to the opposite party No. 1, The State of West Bengal for acquiring the lands in which the petitioners' business was being carried on, for the purpose of the said company under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. Upon such requisition Land Acquisition Case No. 19 of 1948-49 was started. On the 19th of December, 1949 the opposite party No. 1, the Government, issued a declaration under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act and the same was published in the Calcutta Gazette on the 22nd of December, 1949. It is alleged that the petitioners were not mad3 parties to the Land Acquisition proceedings nor was any notice issued to them and nor were the petitioners ever made aware of the existence of such proceedings. It is alleged that respondent No. 4 had surreptitiously and mala fide induced the Government to put in force the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act without disclosing the fact that the petitioners were carrying on the business of manufacturers of bricks on the lands in question. As the fact of the existence of the brick field was suppressed from the Government the estimate of valuation of the said lands was made on the basis that the lands were Doba lands. On the 17th of February, 1953 the opposite party No. 1, that is the government, and the respondent No 4 executed an agreement as is contemplated by section 41 of the Land Acquisition Act and on the very same day a declaration under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was published in the Gazette. The said declaration under section 6 may be set out hereunder: 'hooghly-No. 3270 L. A. =17th February, 1953whereas it appears to the Governor that land is required to be taken by Government at the expense of the Bengal Luxmi Cotton Mill Ltd. , for extension of the Mill, in the village of Mahesh, Jurisdiction list No. 15, thana Serampore Pargana Boro District Hoogly, it is hereby declared that for the above purpose a piece of land comprising cadestral Survey plots Nos. 4308 and 4319 and measuring more or less 4938 acres is required within the aforesaid village of Mahesh.

(3.) THIS declaration is made, under the provisions of section 6 of Act I of 1894 to all whom it may concern. A plan of the land may be inspected in the office of the Land Acquisition Collector, Serampore. " it is alleged in the petition that before the said declaration under section 7 was published no enquiry as contemplated by section 40 of the Land Acquisition Act was made not was any specific consent given by the Government In November, 1953 the petitioners were served with notice under section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act calling for claims for compensation, if any. On the 16th of November, 1953 the petitioners preferred claims for compensation under sections 9 and 23 of the Land Acquisition Act but at the same time they registered their objections as to the legality of the acquisition and reserved their rights to impugn the legality and the validity of the acquisition in proper forum. Upon the petitioners preferring claim for compensation the opposite party No. 3 the Land Acquisition Officer, Hooghly, made a fresh inspection and enquiry on the 25th of June, 1954 and it was at such enquiry that the existence of the brick field came to be known to the Government and the officers concerned. The Land Acquisition Officer thereupon directed a revised valuation. It is further alleged in the petition that as the sanction for acquisition as contemplated under section 40 of the Land Acquisition Act was obtained upon misrepresentation as to the Doba character of the lands and without making the Government and the officers concerned aware of the existence of the brick field, the land acquisition proceedings initiated on the basis of such sanction and the declaration under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act were illegal and void. On the 11th of January, 1955 the Land Acquisition Officer, however, made an award in respect of the acquisition and on the 17th of January, 1955 issued a notice of preparation of such award to the petitioners, which was received by the petitioners on the 20th of January, 1955. On the same day the petitioners also received another notice under section 16 of the Land Acquisition Act asking the petitioners to remove themselves and give possession of the lands by the 22nd of February, 1955. The petitioners thereafter made representation against such notice but as no heed was paid to such representations the petitioners moved this Court and obtained the present Rule on the 9th of March, 1955 from Sinha, j.