Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Shibapada Banerjee & Ors vs Deputy Secretary & Ors on 4 June, 2014
Author: Arindam Sinha
Bench: Arindam Sinha
1
04.06.2014
Srimanta
38
W. P. No. 21785 (W) of 2004
Shibapada Banerjee & Ors.
-versus-
Deputy Secretary & Ors.
Mr. Deb Dutta Sen.
...For the Petitioners.
Mr. Anwar Hossain,
Mr. Swapan Pal.
...For the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
The original allottee along with the widow of his co- allottees in respect of a plot of land in Salt Lake are the petitioners in this writ petition. The original allottees had made an application in the prescribed form which is Annexure - P/1. The said application contains the terms of allotment. The terms provided, inter alia, that the remaining 50 per cent of the premium or salami in respect of the said plot was to be paid within two months of receipt of intimation that the plot was ready for delivery. In default of such payment, the allotment would stand cancelled. The original allottees had also represented in that application that they would duly complete the lease of the plot within such period as may be fixed after demarcation of the plot upon payment of all amounts payable for premium or salami.
The Government by its letter dated 15th July, 1971 informed the allottees that the plot was then ready for delivery. On actual measurement the area of the plot had increased slightly and a demand for the aggregate sum of Rs.4,617.25/- was made and deposit thereof requested within sixty days from the date of that letter for submission of receipt to enable the department to proceed further in the matter.
Mr. Deb Dutta Sen, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that due to unavoidable circumstances including terminal disease suffered by two of the allottees and their death by reason thereof, the payment of the balance premium or salami could not be made in the time directed. However, such payment was made on 24th 2 April, 1981 as evident by receipt nos. 1254 and 1255 both of that date. Pursuant thereto, it is the case of the petitioners that they have been following up the matter for mutation of the names of the legal representatives of the deceased allottees and for further steps being taken in the matter. The petitioners' grievance is that the Government instead of considering their case sympathetically by letter dated 23rd July, 2004 cancelled the allotment which has been challenged in this writ petition.
Mr. Anwar Hossain, learned Advocate appears on behalf of the State and submits that the letter dated 23rd July, 2004 was duly issued with power and authority. The allottees had violated the terms of allotment which invited such cancellation of their allotment.
As appears from the facts recorded above, the balance premium or salami was paid by 24th April, 1981. There is no explanation forthcoming from the State as to why the cancellation came after such a long time that is on 23rd July, 2004 within which time two of the allottees died and several representations have been made by the surviving allottees and the legal representatives of the deceased allottees. In those circumstances, this Court is of the view that the letter of cancellation cannot be sustained and is set aside.
The respondent authorities are directed to consider the representations made by the surviving allottee and the legal representatives of the deceased allottees sympathetically and in accordance with law and dispose of the same within a period of three months from the date of communication of a copy of this order by the petitioners upon the respondent authorities.
The writ petition is disposed of.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned Advocates for the parties on the usual undertakings.
(ARINDAM SINHA, J.)