Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

(Shyamal Kumar Dutta & Anr vs District Magistrate on 16 May, 2016

Author: Dipankar Datta

Bench: Dipankar Datta

                                     1


    23
16.05.2016
   rrc
                              W. P. 8363 (W) of 2016
                  (Shyamal Kumar Dutta & Anr. Vs. District Magistrate,
                                 Burdwan & Ors.)

                 Mr. Pundari Kakshya Bhattacharyya
                                          .......For the petitioners

                 Mr. Amitesh Banerjee
                 Mr. Debabrata Mondal
                                             ........For the State

                 Mr. N. C. Bihani
                                             ........For the prvt. respdts.


                 Grievance of the petitioners relates to alleged illegal filling

             up of a pond at Dag No. 2129 (L.R.)/2123(R.S.) of Mouza-Godo,

             J.L. No. 41, by the private respondents and inaction of the

authorities to arrest such action despite being apprised of the same.

Mr. Bihani, learned advocate for the private respondents contends that classification of the land has been changed to 'shali' and, therefore, question of illegal filling up of any pond does not arise.

Mr. Banerjee, learned senior advocate representing the State submits that on receipt of the petitioner's advocate's notice demanding justice dated 14th March, 2016, the District Magistrate, Burdwan has forwarded the same to the Assistant Director of Fisheries, Burdwan, respondent no. 6 for appropriate action. He submits that the respondent no. 6 may 2 be directed to look into the notice demanding justice and take appropriate action as is warranted on facts and in the circumstances, according to law.

The submission of Mr. Banerjee appears to be fair and reasonable.

The respondent no. 6 shall look into the notice demanding justice, have enquiries conducted in the presence of the representatives of the petitioner and the private respondents, ensure that the copies of the enquiry report are given to the parties and thereafter proceed to take appropriate reasoned decision in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. Needless to observe, the private parties shall be duly communicated the decision taken by him. Let this exercise be completed as early as possible but not later than 8 (eight) weeks from date of receipt of the enquiry report.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible.

( Dipankar Datta, J. )