Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Duranta Kumar Middya vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 24 February, 2015
Author: Tapen Sen
Bench: Tapen Sen
1
5 24.02.2015
C.O.L.R.T. 1 of 2015
AB Court No.34
Duranta Kumar Middya
Vs
State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Hiranmoy Bhattacharya,
Mr. Kamal Mishra,
Mr. Tamal Taru Panda ...for the Petitioner.
Mr. Nibaran Kr. Das,
Mr. Monoranjan Jana ...for the Respondent
Nos. 12 & 13.
Mr. Sadananda Ganguly, Mr. Debapratim Banerjee ...for the State. One of the points argued during the course of submissions is that although there was a specific direction of the Division Bench that the learned Tribunal will decide the question of abatement independently and in accordance with law, the learned Tribunal, without doing so, straightway came to a conclusion that since the abatement on the death of Pramila Middya had been set aside, it was seen that Primila Middya had a case for consideration of her representation.
It is submitted, therefore, that the question of abatement and/or setting aside of the abatement has not been independently dealt with.
This Writ Petition will be heard. Admit. The Private Respondent Nos. 12 and 13 have appeared.
The others are all State Respondents. The State is being represented by Mr. Sadananda Ganguly 2 and, therefore, he will be deemed to be appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 to 11.
Let affidavit-in-opposition be filed within a period of ten weeks. Reply thereto, if any, may be filed within a period of four weeks thereafter.
During the pendency of this application before this Court, the operation of the impugned order dated 29.09.2014 and all further proceedings pending before the West Bengal Land Reforms & Tenancy Tribunal in M. A. No. 525 of 2010 (O. A. No. 3008 of 2003 (LRTT) shall remain stayed.
Mr. Bhattacharya, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, undertakes to supply the complete order-sheet of W.P.L.R.T. 636 of 2004 (Annexure "G").
(Tapen Sen, J.) (Ashis Kumar Chakraborty, J.)