Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sn Dhananjoy Chattopadhyay vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 29 March, 2016
1
8 29.3.16 W.P.L.R.T. 26 of 2016
sn DHANANJOY CHATTOPADHYAY
VS.
STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
Mr. B.N. Roy.. Ld. Advocate
Mr. Sanjoy Ghosh..Ld. Advocate
..for the petitioner
Mr. L.K. Gupta..Ld. Addl. A.G.
Mr. Ziaul Islam..Ld. Advocate
..for the State
This is an application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India assailing an order dated November 18,2015 passed by the West Bengal
Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal, 2nd Bench in the matter of Dhananjoy
Chattopadhyay Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. (In re: Case No.933/14(OA
3259/2014)(LRTT) as also the order dated August 7, 2013 passed by the
respondent no.4 in connection with the statutory appeal Case No.08/13 filed
under Section 54 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955. The order of dismissal of the statutory appeal bearing case no.08/13 dated August 7, 2013 was under challenge before the learned Tribunal.
The above statutory appeal had been filed by the petitioner on the strength of liberty granted to him by an order dated January 31, 2013 passed in WPLRT 157 of 2009. The operative part of the above order is quoted below :-
"In the aforesaid circumstances, we grant liberty to the petitioner to file an application before the D.L.&L.R.O. challenging the order dated 3rd June, 2008 passed by the B.L. & L.R.O. together with an application for condonation of delay within a period of two weeks from date. In the event the appeal is preferred by the appellant together with the application for condonation of delay then the D.L. & L.R.O. will decide the appeal on merits at an early date upon condoning the delay.
Needless to mention that the D.L. & L.R.O. 2 will decide the appeal expeditiously upon observing the rules and procedures as are applicable in this regard.
With the aforesaid directions. We dispose of this petition upon setting aside the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal.
In the facts of the present case, there will be no order as to costs.
(Pranab KumarChattopadhyay,J) (Dipak Saha Ray,J)"
The petitioner filed the statutory appeal on February 14, 2013, i.e. within two weeks. No application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was filed for condonation of delay in terms of the above liberty granted to him. The above statutory appeal was taken up by the respondent no.4 for final hearing on August 7, 2013. On that date, the application under Section 5 was also filed in connection with the above statutory appeal for condonation of delay in filing such appeal on the basis of liberty granted by the aforesaid order dated January 31, 2013 passed in WPLRT 157 of 2009. By virtue of the order dated August 7, 2013, the respondent no.4 dismissed the above statutory appeal as also the above application filed thereto observing that the petitioner had failed to file the application for condonation of delay within the period mentioned in the order dated January 31, 2013 in WP|LRT 157 of 2009.
The petitioner filed the original application under reference assailing the above order dated August 7, 2013 passed by the respondent no.4. By virtue of the impugned order dated November 15, 2015 the original application was dismissed affirming the order dated August 7, 2013 passed by the respondent no.4 in connection with his statutory appeal.
Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties as also after considering the fact and circumstances of this case, we find that admittedly the statutory appeal was filed by the petitioner before the 3 respondent no.4 within the period specified in the order dated January 31, 2013 in WPLRT 157 of 2013 while granting liberty to prefer the statutory appeal. It is also not in dispute that the application under Section 5 for condonation of delay was filed on the date of hearing of the above statutory appeal, i.e. on August 7, 2013. We are of the opinion that the application for condonation of delay under reference should have been taken up by the respondent no.4 in view of the admitted fact of preferring the statutory appeal on February 14, 2013, i.e. within the period specified in the writ application while granting liberty to prefer such statutory appeal.
In view of the above, the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal also cannot be sustained in law.
Therefore, the impugned order dated November 18, 2015 passed by the learned Tribunal in connection with the original application under reference as also the order dated August 7, 2013 passed by the respondent no.4 in connection with the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 54 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 are quashed and set aside.
The respondent no.4 is directed to dispose of the above application of the petitioner filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act in connection with the statutory appeal bearing case no.08/13 afresh within a period of four months from the date of communication of this order.
We make it clear that we have not interfered with the merits of the claim of the petitioner and all points are kept open.
This writ petition is thus disposed of.
There will be, however, no order as to costs.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on priority basis.
4
(Debasish Kar Gupta, J.) (Md. Mumtaz Khan, J.) 5 6