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 1, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Tapan Kumar Som vs Naru Gopal Mukherjee & Anr on 2 January, 2025

02-01-2025            IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
 Item no.419                   Special Civil Jurisdiction
 Subrata                             Appellate Side
Bhattacharyya
  AR(C)
                                 CPAN No.1678 of 2023
                                    Tapan Kumar Som
                                           -vs-
                               Naru Gopal Mukherjee & Anr.
                                           arising out of
                                    WPA No.11320 of 2023


                      Mr. Saptansu Basu, sr. adv.
                      Mr. Achintya Banerjee, adv.
                      Mr. Ananta Shaw, adv.
                      Ms. Sumita Shaw, adv.
                      Mr. Soumen Chatterjee, adv.
                      Ms. Shyani Das, adv.                    ...for the petitioner

                      Mr. Asish Kumar Guha, adv.
                      Mr. Anirban Dutta, adv.                   ...for the State

                      Mr. Arindam Das, adv.
                      Ms. Priyanka Patra, adv.              ...for the contemnors



                1.

Learned senior counsel representing the petitioner draws attention of the court to the report filed by the Berhampore Municipality singed by the Executive Officer on June 25, 2024 in support of the submission that the compensatory water body was made over LR plot no.64/1013.

2. The report of the municipality clearly mentions that the portion identified by the owner of the water body to be the compensatory water body appeared to be a highland and that the same has not been converted to a water body. No trace of water was found there. It was found to be a low land of 8 ft. depth.

3. Upon query from the local public, it could not be ascertained as to whether the water body was ever filled with water or not. The alleged water body has 2 been created in Cossimbazar which is adjacent to the mouza Madhupur. The conversion of the water body was made in the Madhupur mouza and the compensatory water body is to be created in the same mouza or adjacent mouza. Mouza Cossimbazar is not adjacent to mouza Madhupur. Between Madhupur and Cossimbazar, there is another mouza named Bishnupur mouza.

4. From the report it does not appear that the compensatory water body was physically found at the time of spot inspection. The petitioner asserts that the water body was created, but because of the summer season, no water was found there.

5. Let a fresh spot inspection be conducted by Block Land & Land Reforms Officer, Berhampore in the presence of the petitioner and the representative of the municipality. The photograph of the compensatory water body identified by the petitioner shall be produced before this court on the returnable date along with a report to be filed by the BL&LRO. Such inspection shall be conducted within a fortnight from date and report be placed before this court on January 30, 2025.

6. Proper measurement of the compensatory water body as identified shall also be taken in the presence of the parties in terms of the permission dated July 7, 2021 granted under section 4(c) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955.

7. List the contempt application once again on January 30, 2025.

8. All parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

[Amrita Sinha, J] 3