Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sk. Asif Hossain vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 1 July, 2013
Author: Soumitra Pal
Bench: Soumitra Pal
1
52 01.07.2013
SD
W. P. 12302 (W) of 2012
Sk. Asif Hossain.
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Md. Fida Rasul.
... For the Petitioner.
Ms. Paramita Pal.
... For Respdt. No. 5.
Mr. Pradip Dutta,
Ms. Debjani Roy.
... For the State.
Affidavit-of-service filed today be kept with the record.
In the writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a direction upon
the Prodhan, Gram Panchayat No. 4, Nandigram, in the district of
Purba Medinipur, the respondent no. 4 to take steps against the
construction raised by the private respondent no.5 alleged to have been made in deviation of the provisions contained in the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973. Submission has been made that though the matter was brought to the notice of the respondent no. 4, however, no steps have been taken. Aggrieved this writ petition has been filed.
It is further submitted that during the pendency of the writ petition the respondent no. 4 has issued a stop work notice dated 24th September, 2012 directing the private respondent not to proceed with the construction.
Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the private respondent denying the allegations made in the writ petition submit that pursuant to an application dated 8th March, 2006, the construction proceeded after deposit of necessary charges. It is further submitted that the Block Land & Land Reforms Officer, Nandigram-I, Purba Medinipur by Memo dated 28th March, 2006 addressed to the Officer-in-Charge Nandigram 2 Police Station had intimated that the private respondent was going to construct the house upon her portion of land without encroaching any land of the applicant therein and there was no objection from his office. Further the respondent no. 4 on 4th April, 2012 had certified that she had raised the construction leaving a space of 90 centi-metres.
Heard learned advocates for the parties. It is to be noted whether the construction carried out by the respondent no. 5 is in accordance with the provisions of the Act or not, is a disputed question of fact which cannot be gone into in the writ jurisdiction. However, as dispute has been raised, the writ petition is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to file a representation, annexing relevant documents, before the Prodhan, the respondent no. 4 within four weeks from the date of presentation of a copy of the certified copy of this order. If such representation is filed, same shall be disposed of by the respondent no. 4 by passing a reasoned order to be communicated to the parties within eight weeks after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to the respondent no. 5 and after verifying the original documents and records and after causing inspection of the site in question either personally or by a duly authorized representative. Prior to hearing, copy of such representation shall be served on the respondent no. 5. After the order is passed, it shall have to be ratified by the Nandigram-I Gram Panchayat within four weeks. If it is found that unauthorized construction has been raised, the respondent no. 4 shall take steps for demolition of the same in accordance with law.
It is made clear that I have not gone into the merits of the matter and all points are left open to be dealt with by the respondent no. 4 in the event representation is filed within the time as stipulated.
There will be no order as to costs.
(SOUMITRA PAL, J.) 3