Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Pradip Prasad vs The State Of West Bengal & on 18 July, 2016
Author: Debasish Kar Gupta
Bench: Debasish Kar Gupta
1
18 18.7.16 W.P.L.R.T.61 of 2016
PRADIP PRASAD VS. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL &
ORS.
Mr. Arindam Banerjee
Ms. Manali Ali
Mr. Zulfiqar Ali
Mr. Navjyot Saluja
Mr. Manoj Sharma
..for the petitioner
Mr. Chandi Charan De
Mr. Soumitra Bandopadhyay
..for the State
None appears on behalf of the respondent nos. 5 to 9 when the
matter is called on. No accommodation is prayed for. Let the affidavit of service be kept on record.
This writ application is directed against a final order dated October 7, 2015 passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms & Tenancy Tribunal, Second Bench, in the matter of Birshi Oraon & Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. (In re : O.A. 1145 of 2015 of 2015 (LRTT).
By virtue of the impugned order, the learned Tribunal directed the Block Land & Land Reforms Officer, Raiganj, District Jalpaiguri to dispose of the representation of the respondent nos. 5 to 9 dated July 28, 2014.
The subject matter involved in the above representation was a correction of record of rights in respect of the land measuring 0.24 acres in plot no.383/900 in C.S. Khatian no. 199 and 1.3 acres of land in plot no.383 of C.S. Khatian no. 199, lying and situated at Mouza Debgram, Block Raiganj, P.S. Baktinagar, District Jalpaiguri. According to the petitioner, he was party interested to the above proceeding but he was not impleaded as parties to the above original application before the Tribunal.
Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties present before this Court today as also after considering the materials on record, 2 we find that an appeal under Section 44(3) of the West Bengal State Acquisition Act read with Section 2(R)(1) of the West Bengal Land Reforms & Tenancy Tribunal Act, 1997 has been filed by the petitioner before the learned Tribunal in respect of the same plots of land. Therefore, he was the party interested to the above proceeding in which the impugned order was passed.
The point of law relating to disposal of an original application without impleading the necessary party to a proceeding has been decided by this Court by an order dated February 26, 2016 in the matter of Biswajit Jana Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. ( In re : WPLRT 224 of 2015) and the relevant portion of the above decision is quoted below :-
"Therefore, we are of the opinion that it was open for the writ petitioner to avail of the following three options to protect his interest which might have been affected by the order dated March 19, 2014 passed in O.A. No.3812 of 2013 (LRTT) without impleading him as a party.
(i)To file an appropriate
application in the above original
application;
(ii)To file an independent original
application; or
(iii)An application under Article
226 of the Constitution of India before the appropriate Division Bench of this High Court assailing the aforesaid order dated March 19, 2014 passed in O.A. No.3812 of 2013 (LRTT).
Therefore, there was no bar and/or impediment for the learned Tribunal to entertain the original application bearing O.A. No.1931 of 2014 (LRTT), as one of the options available to the writ petitioner had been chosen by him. The learned Tribunal was in error in dismissing the above original application by virtue of the order 3 impugned granting liberty to the writ petitioner to file an application for recalling of the order dated March 19, 2014 passed in O.A. No.3812 of 2013 (LRTT) which was one of the aforesaid options, as discussed hereinabove.
It is necessary to observe that in the event of availing of the opportunity of the above third option, generally, the High Court is to send the matter back to the learned Tribunal after setting aside the order impugned. If it is prima-facie found that the writ petitioner is a necessary party to the proceeding before the learned Tribunal, then the same is the appropriate forum to consider the matter afresh as a court of first instance after addition of the aforesaid party to the proceeding."
In view of the above settled proposition of law, the impugned order is quashed and set aside.
The learned Tribunal is directed to dispose of the above original application after making the petitioner as party to the above proceeding.
Let it be made clear that we have not considered any of the issues involved in the above original application on merits and all points are kept open for consideration by the learned Tribunal.
This writ petition is thus disposed of.
There will be, however, no order as to costs.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on priority basis.
(Debasish Kar Gupta, J.) 4 (Md. Mumtaz Khan, J.) 5 6