DHANAL MANTOOLAL RAO Vs. AJIT KUMAR BANERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first point urged by Mr. Ganguli in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is that the proceeding in this Court should be stayed under the provisions of the West Bengal Ordinance No. V of 1967. I do not agree.

(2.) Mr. Ganguli refers to the preamble of the Ordinance which runs as follows:

(3.) Therefore, the intention was that temporary stay would be granted with regard to the proceeding for ejectment. With that intention the Governor was pleased to promulgate in Sec. 3 of the Ordinance that all applications for ejectment of the thika tenant, under the provisions of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act which are pending at the commencement of this Ordinance, would be stayed. Similarly, all appeals from orders on such applications which were pending would also be stayed and finally all proceedings in execution of orders for ejectment will also be stayed. Therefore, with an intention to stay temporarily all proceedings for ejectment the Governor promulgated the Ordinance for stay of some of the matters and not all of the matters. The scope was limited to all applications which were pending, all appeals pending and all proceedings in execution under the provisions of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act.