Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
5.07.13 (Smt. Sandhya Barik & Ors vs State Of West Bengal & Ors.) on 5 July, 2013
1
W. P. 22619 (W) OF 2012
05.07.13 (Smt. Sandhya Barik & Ors. -vs- State of West Bengal & Ors.)
ag/jb
Sl.No.10
Mr. Tapan Chakraborty
Mr. Balai Lal Sahoo
Mr. S. P. Ray - for the petitioners
Mr. Tapas Kumar Mondal - for the respondent no.11
Mr. Milon Ch. Bhattacharyya Mr. Srinjay Sengupta Mr. S. Ray Mr. Sk. Sahjahan Ali - for the applicants Mr. Shyamal Sanyal - for the State RE: C. A. N. 6267 OF 2013 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties on the application being C. A. N. 6267 of 2013.
The applicants have filed the application for recall of the order passed by this Court in Public Interest Litigation on 18.1.2013 passed in W. P. 22619 (W) of 2012. It is submitted by the applicants in the said application that there is no existence of canal so far the lands of the applicants are concerned. Even if in the record of rights there is an entry of canal, opportunity of rebuttal ought to be given, the proceedings before the Block Land & Land Reforms Officer are not proper. They are the bona fide purchasers of the property. Thus, the order passed by this Court in the Public Interest Litigation be recalled and/or modified.
It is not disputed at the Bar that the order passed by this Court had been assailed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has dismissed the Petition for Special Leave to appeal (Civil) No. 10801 of 2013 filed against the judgement and order dated 18.1.2013, vide order dated 1.3.2013.
It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants that applicants were not the parties to the Public Interest Litigation and there is no continuous canal on this spot. 2 Opportunity of rebuttal of Revenue Records ought to have been given, they were not parties in the Public Interest Litigation. The proceedings instituted by the Block Land & Land Reforms Officer are not in accordance with law.
This Court had directed that encroachment in the canal be removed in accordance with law. The order passed by this Court is proper. No case has been made out so as to recall the order passed by this Court or to modify it. It was not necessary to hear each and every person, who has made encroachment to the canal as action has to be taken in accordance with law as directed by us for removal of encroachment. Obviously, no case has been made out to recall or modify the order.
We find no ground so as to recall or modify the order passed by this Court on the ground urged.
The application being C. A. N. 6267 of 2013 is, thus, dismissed. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has prayed for time to submit compliance report. Let compliance report be submitted within a period of four weeks, failing which the District Magistrate and Block Land & Land Reforms Officer are directed to be present in Court on the next date and to show cause why they have not complied with the order.
List the matter on 13th August, 2013.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the learned counsel for the State for compliance. (Joymalya Bagchi, J.) (Arun Mishra, Chief Justice)