Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Santosh Kumar Bhuniya vs Sri Partha Ghosh & Ors on 2 March, 2020
Author: Subrata Talukdar
Bench: Subrata Talukdar
1
02.03.2020 CPAN 238 of 2019
C.L.-9(KB) with
RVW 96 of 2018
in
WP 23441 (W) of 2015
Santosh Kumar Bhuniya
-Versus-
Sri Partha Ghosh & Ors.
Mr. Joy Saha
Mr. Ishaan Saha
Mr. Subhyojit Saha
... For the petitioner.
Mr. Rabindra Narayan Dutta
Mr. Hare Krishna Halder
... For the alleged contemnor.
Mr. Suman Dey
... For the applicant in
RVW 96 of 2018.
Party/parties is/are represented in the order
of their name/names as printed above in the cause
title.
The attention of this Court is drawn to its
previous order dated 27th January, 2020 recording,
inter alia, that the order of this Court dated 2nd
December, 2019 is under challenge in an appeal
2
filed by the State-respondents/the alleged
contemnors.
After hearing the parties and again considering the materials placed, this Court finds as follows:
a) That the parent order in the writ petition dated 8th December, 2017 is not the subject matter of the appeal;
b) That the order of this Court dated 2nd December, 2019 passed pursuant to taking notice of the contempt and the review applications filed respectively by the petitioner and by the State-
respondents/the alleged contemnors is the subject matter of the pending appeal;
c) That the order dated 2nd December, 2019 is, to the mind of this Court at this stage only procedural directing the 3 Respondents/Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) /the alleged contemnor no.2 to revisit the compensation amount payable to the petitioner under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short the 2013 Act);
d) A combined reading of a), b) and c) above points to the prima facie position that the State-respondents/alleged contemnors are avoiding the hard issue of revisiting the quantum of compensation eligible to be received by the petitioner under the 2013 Act on the plea that the quantum stood already pre-assessed and deposited with the Learned Land Acquisition Judge even before the parent order dated 8th 4 December, 2017 came into the picture. Hence the review application. In an attempt to take a holistic view of the matter, the petitioners are directed to put in a short Affidavit on the total value of the land eligible to be received by them under the 2019 Act corresponding to the period December, 2017.
Let an advance copy of the short Affidavit be served to Mr. Dutta by the next date.
It is prima facie made clear that pending any order in the appeal and having regard to the age of the petitioner, who is presently stated to be of 85 years, further and appropriate consequential orders will be considered on the next date.
Let the matter return under the same heading "Contempt Applications" in usual position in the Combined Monthly List of April, 2020. 5 (Subrata Talukdar, J.)