Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Dinesh Agarwal vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 4 January, 2017
Author: Debasish Kar Gupta
Bench: Debasish Kar Gupta
1
04.01.2017
srm
W.P.L.R.T. No. 123 of 2016
Dinesh Agarwal
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Rabilal Maitra, ld. Sr. Advocate
Mr. Rajitlal Maitra, ld. Advocate
...for the Petitioner.
Mr. Pranab Kumar Dutta, ld. Sr. Advocate
Mr. P.B. Mahata, ld. Advocate
Mr. Tulshidas Ray
...for the State.
This writ application is directed against an order dated November 22,
2016 passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal in the
matter of Dinesh Agarwal vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. [In Re: O.A.
No.2500 of 2015 (LRTT)]. By virtue of the impugned order, the learned Tribunal
was not inclined to interfere with the order dated May 29, 2015 passed by the
respondent No2. The respondent No.2 rejected the representation of the
petitioner to correct the record of rights in respect of the land in question describing as 'Pahar'.
This matter has a chequered history as follows.
The land in question was given to the petitioner on mining lease for a period of 5 years since 1994. After expiry of the lease period, he applied before 2 the authorities concerned for renewal of the above lease. It was not renewed. The petitioner filed an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India bearing W.P. No.17778 (W) of 2000 and the same was disposed of by an order dated February 7, 2001 setting aside an order dated August 11, 2000 passed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Commerce and Industries Department as also directing the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal of the above department to pass a reasoned order in the matter treating the above writ application as the representation of the petitioner.
In compliance of the aforesaid order, the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Commerce and Industries Department obtained a report dated June 15, 2001 from the District Land and Land Reforms Officer, Purulia on physical verification of the land in question. Taking into consideration the above report as also after giving opportunity of hearing to the persons concerned including the petitioner, the Secretary to the Government West Bengal, Commerce and Industries Department passed an order dated July 2, 2001 allowing the prayer of M/s. Chiranjeelal (minerals) Industries for renewal of mining lease for extraction of lime stone was further directed to cause necessary correction in respect of record of rights of the land in question Since no step was taken by the department concerned, i.e. the Land and Land Reforms Department, Government of West Bengal, to cause necessary 3 correction in respect of the land in question in the record of rights. A representation dated September 4, 2013 was submitted by the petitioner to the Additional Chief Secretary and Commissioner, Land and Land Reforms Department, Government of West Bengal. Due to inaction on the part of the above authority, an original application bearing O.A. No.1133 of 2014 (LRTT) was filed before the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal. The above original application was disposed of by the learned Tribunal on February 10, 2015 directing the respondent No.2 to take appropriate action and to dispose of the issue in accordance with law treating the original application along with its annexures as representation of the petitioner within the petitioner specified therein after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioner.
In compliance of the aforesaid order, an order dated May 29, 2015 was passed by the respondent No.2 rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to act on the basis of the order dated July 2, 2001 passed by the Secretary to the Government West Bengal, Commerce and Industries Department in the matter of correction of record of rights of the land in question as 'pahar' in place of 'pahar jungle'.
Having heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respective parties as also after considering the facts and circumstances of this case, we find 4 that admittedly the Secretary to the Government West Bengal, Commerce and Industries Department arrived at a conclusion that the error which took place in respect of the record of rights so far as the land in question was concerned was erroneous. Accordingly, he directed for renewal of the mining lease in favour of the petitioner as also forwarded the matter to the Land and Land Reforms Department, Government of West Bengal for causing necessary correction in respect of the record of rights of the land in question.
Needless to point out that the Secretary to the Government West Bengal, Commerce and Industries Department arrived at his aforesaid decision in compliance of an order passed in a writ application by this Court. It is also not in dispute that the respondent No.2 did not act on the basis of the finding of the Secretary to the Government West Bengal, Commerce and Industries Department and passed a reasoned order taking a contrary view.
In our opinion, the order passed by the respondent No.2 cannot be sustained in law in view of the fact that in the event the highest officer of a department of the same Government had passed an order any contrary view must be forwarded to the highest officer of the department concerned for his further consideration. In other words, in order to unsettle a decision of the Secretary to the Government West Bengal, Commerce and Industries Department, a lower dignitary of the another department, namely Additional 5 District Magistrate and District Land and Land Reforms Officer, Purulia cannot pass a contrary order ignoring the aforesaid former decision. Assuming that any error or ignorance is detected in the former order the attention of the highest authority, i.e. the Principal Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Land and Land Reforms Officer should have been drawn for his consideration and in the event of his disagreement with the order of the Secretary to the Government West Bengal, Commerce and Industries Department, the matter should have been forwarded to the officer of his department holding the equivalent rank to the Secretary to the Government West Bengal, Commerce and Industries Department. In the event there is no difference of opinion with the opinion of the former authority then the dispute comes to an end but in the event of disagreement and conflicting view of the two departments the entire matter should have been referred to the Chief Secretary to the Government of West Bengal for deciding the issue once for all at the executive level.
In the event of failure on the part of any officer of a Government to act in the manner discussed hereinabove there will be a mess so far as the functioning of the Government is concerned.
In view of the above discussions and observations made hereinabove, the order dated November 22, 2016 passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms and 6 Tenancy Tribunal in O.A. No. 2500 of 2015(LRTT) as also the order dated May 29, 2015 passed by the respondent No.2 are quashed and set aside.
The Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Land and Land Reforms Officer or the officer of the above department who is holding the equivalent rank to that of the Secretary to the Government West Bengal, Commerce and Industries Department is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated September 4, 2013 (at page 119 of this writ application) afresh in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or his authorised representative as also the representatives of the department concerned and to pass a reasoned order for taking necessary action in the matter in the event there is no disagreement with the earlier order dated July 2, 2001 passed by the Secretary to the Government West Bengal, Commerce and Industries Department. However, in the event of any disagreement or contradiction with the aforesaid previous decision, the entire matter is directed to be forwarded to the Chief Secretary to the Government of West Bengal for deciding the issue once for all at the administrative level and in that event the Chief Secretary to the Government of West Bengal is directed to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law in the matter after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or his authorised representative as also the representatives of 7 the departments concerned. The entire procedure is directed to be completed within April 30, 2017.
We make it clear that we have not entered into the merits of the dispute and all points are kept open.
This writ application is, thus, disposed of.
There will be, however, no order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, subject to compliance with all necessary formalities.
( Debasish Kar Gupta, J. ) (Md. Mumtaz Khan, J.)