Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
75/2010 on 6 December, 2010
Author: Pratap Kumar Ray
Bench: Pratap Kumar Ray
1
06.12.
2010
W.P.L.R.T. 75 of 2010
Mr. Jagadish Das,
Mr. Radhasyam Maiti ... For the petitioners.
Mr. Jayanta Kumar Das,
Mr. Sadananda Karmakar ...For the
respondent Nos.4 to 6.
None appears for the State.
Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties. Assailing the order dated 18.8.2009 passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal in O.A. No.1010 of 2009 (LRTT), this writ application has been filed.
The impugned order reads such.
" 18.08.09 Ld. Counsel for the petitioners submits their prayer for retention of land in pursuance of the order dt. 01.10.01 passed in O.A.No.140 of 2001 (LRTT). It appears that in compliance with that order the ld. Revenue Officer has taken up a misc. case being no. 4 of 1997 and disposed of the same on 18.08.03 in accordance with law. Hence, we have nothing to do at this stage to consider the prayer and there is nothing to interfere with the order. O.A. No.1010 of 2009(LRTT) stands dismissed.
Sd/: A.K.Mitra T.K.Chakraborty"
In the Original Application the petitioners prayed for relief as follows:-
" 8. RELIEF SOUGHT FOR :2
That the above facts and circumstances as mentioned in paragraph 6 of the above, the applicants may be graciously pleased to pray the following reliefs:-
(a) To pass an order directing the respondents particularly Block Land & Land Reforms Officer, Contai-I to review and/or recalling the order impugned in Misc. Case no.4/97 passed violating the provisions of the said Act and order passed by the Learned Tribunal in O.A.No.140/2001(LRTT) and to complete the Misc. Case No.99/2008 in connection with O.A. No.449/2008 (LRTT) within a specific period as the Learned Tribunal deem fit and proper and to pass an order directing the authorities concerned to transmit those record in connection with the said case before the Learned Tribunal so that conscionable justice may be done and to pass such further order or orders as the Learned Tribunal may deem fit and proper."
From the order of the learned Tribunal, it appears that there is reason assigned as to why the petitioners' application seeking review or calling of the order dated 18th August, 2003 should not be considered by the concerned Revenue officer in accordance with law. Learned Tribunal simply has said that the order was passed and the Tribunal had nothing to say. From the pleading of the Original Application the writ petitioners have made out a case claiming right over the property, a constitutional right and accordingly prayed for recalling or review of the order dated 18th August, 2003 passed by 0the concerned Revenue Officer in Misc. Case No. 4 of 1997. Learned Tribunal ought to have considered the issue on the basis of the pleading made and thereby on merit could have decided the matter either rejecting the Original Application or allowing the same, but without doing so simply by one line in order it was said "already an order has been passed" and not decided the Original Application, particularly with reference to the pleading as made.
Considering that, we are sending back the matter by setting aside and quashing the impugned order.
3
The writ petition is disposed of.
Learned Tribunal is directed to hear the matter de novo and to pass a reasoned order on taking note of the pleading made, in the Original Application.
(Pratap Kumar Ray, J.) (Mrinal Kanti Sinha, J.)