Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Rinku Maity vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 28 November, 2013
Author: Jyotirmay Bhattacharya
Bench: Jyotirmay Bhattacharya
1
28.11.2013. W.P.L.R.T 282 of 2013
dc.
Rinku Maity
versus
State of West Bengal & Ors.
Md. Nure Zaman ... For the Petitioner.
Mr. Amal Kumar Das ... For the State-Respondents.
On the prayer of the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, we permit him to expunge the respondent No. 12 from the writ petition as the presence of respondent No. 12 is not necessary for disposal of this writ petition.
By the impugned order dated 19th August, 2013 passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal, Fourth Bench in O.A. No. 3691 of 2012 (LRTT), petitioner's application for correction of record of rights under Section 50 read with Section 51BB of West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 filed before the concerned B.L.&L.R.O., was held to be not maintainable by the learned Tribunal and as such the learned Tribunal refused to pass any direction upon the concerned B.L.&L.R.O. for expeditious disposal of the petitioner's said application under Section 50 read with Section 51BB of the said Act.
The legality and/or propriety of the said order is under challenge in this writ petition at the instance of the petitioner.
2Let us now consider as to how far the learned Tribunal was justified in passing the impugned order in the facts of the instant case.
Earlier the petitioner applied for correction of record of rights under Section 51A of the said Act before the concerned Revenue Officer. The said application was ultimately rejected by the Revenue Officer by holding inter alia that the petitioner's said application was barred by limitation. The concerned B.L.&L.R.O. held that the L.R. record of rights was finally published in 1980 and the petitioner applied for correction of the said L.R. record of rights 25 years after final publication of the said L.R. record of rights.
Section 51A(4) of the said Act provides a period of limitation of one year in case such correction is necessary at the instance of the applicant. The said provision also provides a period of limitation of 35 years in case such correction is needed on the own motion of the Revenue Officer.
Since correction of record of rights was prayed for by the applicant, we are of the view that her application was barred by limitation and as such we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the Revenue Officer in rejecting her said application on the ground of limitation.
Admittedly the said order of the Revenue Officer was not challenged in appeal. The applicant accepted the said order.
Having regard to the fact that the L.R. record of rights was finally published in the concerned Mouza, the petitioner 3 subsequently applied for correction of the record of rights under Section 50 read with Section 51BB of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act before the Revenue Officer.
Since the said application remains unattended from the end of the concerned Revenue Officer, the petitioner moved an application being O.A. No. 3691 of 2012 (LRTT) before the learned Tribunal seeking issuance of direction upon the concerned Revenue Officer for early disposal of her application for correction of record of rights.
The learned Tribunal refused to pass any direction upon the concerned authority for disposing of the petitioner's said application on merit as the learned Tribunal was of the view that the said application is not maintainable as the order which was passed by the Revenue Officer on the petitioner's earlier application for correction of record of rights under Section 51A attained its finality as no appeal was preferred by the applicant challenging the said order of the Revenue Officer before the higher forum.
Let us now consider as to how far the learned Tribunal was justified in coming to the aforesaid conclusion.
Here is the case where the petitioner earlier applied for correction of record of rights under Section 51A of the said Act. Section 51A of the said Act provides for correction of record of rights pending preparation of the record of rights.
Having regard to the fact that the L.R. record of rights had already been finally published, Section 51A of the said Act 4 cannot be availed of by the petitioner for correction of record of rights. As such it was rightly rejected by the Revenue Officer. We do not find any illegality in the said order.
However, Section 50 of the said Act can be availed of by the petitioner for correction of record of rights after final publication of the L.R. record of rights. Subsequent application filed by the petitioner for correction of record of rights under Section 50 of the said Act is thus founded on a different cause of action having no co-relation with the earlier cause of action which was the foundation of the petitioner's earlier application for correction under Section 51A of the said Act.
As such we are of the view that even though the petitioner's earlier application for correction of record of rights under Section 51A of the said Act was rejected by the Revenue Officer and the same attained finality, but still then the petitioner's subsequent application for correction of record of rights under Section 50 of the said Act cannot be held to be barred by res judicata, inasmuch as the subsequent application was founded on a different set of cause of action and under different provision of law. As such we hold that the learned Tribunal was not justified in holding that the petitioner's subsequent application for correction of record of rights under Section 50 read with Section 51BB of West Bengal Land Reforms Act is not maintainable.
We have doubts as to whether Section 51BB of the said Act has any application in the present case as we find that such a provision was sought to be relied upon by the petitioner, but still then we have no hesitation to hold that 5 Section 50 of the said Act can be availed of by the petitioner in the facts of the instant case.
As such, we dispose of the instant writ petition by directing the concerned B.L.&L.R.O. to consider the petitioner's application for correction of record of rights by treating it as an application under Section 50 of West Bengal Land Reforms Act and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other interested parties positively within a period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of this order.
The order passed on 19th August, 2013 by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal, Fourth Bench in O.A. No. 3691 of 2012 (LRTT) is thus set aside.
The writ petition is, thus, disposed of.
Let the affidavit-of-service filed in Court today, be kept with the record.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the applicant as early as possible.
(JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA, J.) ( ARINDAM SINHA, J. )