Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
6/2010 on 29 April, 2010
Author: Pratap Kumar Ray
Bench: Pratap Kumar Ray
29.4.2010. W.P.L.R.T. No. 6 of 2010
Mr. Anil Kumar Chattopadhyay
... for the petitioner.
Mr. Sitaram Samanta
.. for the State.
Mr. Somnath Roy Chowdhury
.. for the respondent nos. 4 to 9.
_______
Pratap Kumar Ray, J. (Oral)
Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties. Assailing the order dated 11th September, 2009 passed in O.A. No. 539 of 2009 (LRTT) by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal, this writ application has been filed.
The impugned order reads such:-
"11.9.09. Both sides are present.
Report submitted by the Ld. Govt. Representative be kept with the record. Affidavit of service as filed on behalf of the applicants and also the application for appropriate order of stay be kept with the record.
The B.L. & L.R.O. concerned is directed to conclude the proceeding in Case No. 1 of 2008 and 15 of 2009 by giving opportunities of being heard to all the parties concerned and serve notice to all the parties and to dispose of the cases within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order.
O.A. No. 539 of 2009 (LRTT) stands disposed of..." 2
It is the grievance of the learned Advocate for the writ petitioner that an application for appropriate order was filed seeking, inter alia, for disposal of O.A. No. 539 of 2009 (LRTT) along with O.A. No. 959 of 2008 (LRTT) for effective adjudication of the lis.
The O.A. No. 959 of 2008 (LRTT) was filed by the present writ petitioner praying for necessary direction to the concerned Revenue Officer to dispose of the application under Section 17 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 seeking cancellation of entry of Borgadar from the record of rights and the present O.A. No. 539 of 2009 (LRTT) was filed by the private respondents herein praying, inter alia, recording of their names as legal heirs and representatives of recorded Borgadar who breathed last long back.
Learned Tribunal below without disposing of the application filed by the present writ petitioner for appropriate order of stay of Bhag Chas Case No. 15 of 2009 as well as for hearing and disposal of both original applications aforesaid analogously, disposed of O.A. No. 539 of 2009 (LRTT) directing the concerned Revenue Officer to dispose of the Borga Proceeding Case No. 15 of 2009 initiated as per application of the present writ petitioner and Proceeding No. 1 of 2008 as initiated on the application of Private respondents. It appears that without disposing the O.A. No. 959 of 2008 (LRTT) a 3 direction was given about the relief in connection with the said original application to conclude the proceeding in Case No. 1 of 2008.
In view of such state of affairs, we are of the view that order is not legally sustainable for the two reasons, namely, (1) the order was passed without adjudicating the application for appropriate order as filed by the present writ petitioner and (2) order directing the Revenue Officer to dispose of Case No. 1 of 2008 was passed without adjudicating O.A. No. 959 of 2008 (LRTT).
Considering the aforesaid reasonings, the impugned order is set aside and quashed.
Learned Tribunal below is directed to dispose of the application for appropriate order first and thereby to pass appropriate order as will be considered by him fit and proper, namely, the hearing of both the applications analogously and to pass appropriate order therein.
The writ application is accordingly allowed.
(Pratap Kumar Ray, J.) I agree.
(Mrinal Kanti Sinha, J.) 4