Smt. Saroj Devi Dhandhania vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 23 February, 2015

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Smt. Saroj Devi Dhandhania vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 23 February, 2015

Bench: Tapen Sen

                                                  1


 23/2/2015
(16) Ct. no.34
 ARDR

                                       WPLRT 23 of 2015


                                  Smt. Saroj Devi Dhandhania
                                              Vs.
                                  State of West Bengal & Ors.



                 Mr. Chitra Bhanu Gupta,
                                                   ...for the Petitioner.


                 Mr. Pranab Dutta,
                 Mr. Tulsidas Ray
                                                        ...for the State.



                       Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the

                 learned counsel for the State.

                       This Writ Petition is directed against an Order dated

                 27/8/2014 (Annexure P-8 at page 55), whereby and whereunder

                 the learned Tribunal directed that T. A. no. 1025 of 2007 (M .A.

                 no. 910 of 2012) (LRTT) should appear under the heading

                 'Motions' on 17/12/2014 gave liberty to the Petitioner to seek

                 modification of the Order dated 27/11/2013.

                       Learned   Counsel   for    the   Petitioner   states   that   on

                 17/12/2014 the matter has again been adjourned and has been

                 fixed on 9th October, 2015.

                       A very short point has been raised by the learned Counsel

                 for the Petitioner and that is that after the learned Tribunal

                 passed an Order on 27/11/2013 holding that it had no

                 jurisdiction to adjudicate the issue, it could not have thereafter

                 passed the impugned Order on 27/8/2014 directing that the

                 matter be listed subsequently under the heading 'For Motions'.
                                         2



      We are inclined to agree with the submission of the

learned Counsel for the Petitioner because it is a well known

concept of law that once a statutory functionary and even a

judicial body passes an Order, it becomes functus officio and

thereafter the matter cannot be allowed to be reopened on the

basis of miscellaneous applications or whatever.

      In this case, learned Tribunal has gone against the

aforementioned principle of law, although, the learned Tribunal

will be deemed to have functus officio after having passed the

Order dated 27/11/2013.

      For the reasons stated above, we set aside the Order dated

27/8/2014

and Direct the learned Tribunal to transfer all records pertaining to T. A. no. 1025 of 2007 (M. A. no. 910 of 2012) (LRTT). Once such records are transferred to this Court, we give liberty to the Petitioner to make appropriate mentioning for listing of that case.

The Tribunal must ensure the transfer of the records, stated above, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands Disposed of.

If urgent certified copy of this Order, duly photocopied, is applied for by the parties, the same should be given expeditiously.

(Tapen Sen, J.) (Ashis Kumar Chakraborty, J.)

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)