Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Tapas Kumar Ghosh & Ors vs Asish Dey & Ors on 9 September, 2019
1
(A s s i g n e d)
1 09.9.19 C.P.A.N. 1645 OF 2016
Sc with
C.A.N. 11072 OF 2016
(Application for injunction)
in
W.P. 18340 (W) OF 2016
------------
Tapas Kumar Ghosh & Ors.
-vs.-
Asish Dey & Ors.
Mr. Supriyo Chattopadhyay ....For the Petitioners.
Mr. Nilanjan Bhattacharya Mr. Sekhar Barman.
....For the alleged Contemnor No.1.
Mr. Probal Mukherjee Mr. Subhasish Pachal.
....For the alleged Contemnor Nos.2 & 3.
Mr. Tapan Kumar Mukherjee Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee.
....For the alleged Contemnor No.4.
Mr. Mrityunjoy Goswami Mr. Parikshit Goswami.
....For the alleged Contemnor No.5.
Mr. Bhattacharya, learned advocate for the alleged contemnor no.1 submits that his application seeking permission for conversion of land has been rejected by the relevant authority and that within three weeks he would submit a fresh application giving particulars of an alternative plot of land whereon a compensatory water body is proposed to be created by him. Permission in this behalf is sought for.
2We grant permission to the alleged contemnor no.1 to submit an application with full particulars by three weeks from date. The result of consideration of such application by the relevant authority shall be produced before us on the date when we assemble next.
Insofar as creation of compensatory water bodies by the alleged contemnors 2 and 3 on plot nos. 3832 and 3837 in mouza - Srikrishnapur Char are concerned, a report contained in memo dated 31st May, 2019 of the Sub- Divisional Land & Land Reforms Officer, Kalyani, Nadia has been filed by Mr. Mukherjee, learned Additional Government Pleader. For the reasons indicated in such report, the plots could not be identified. There was also none at the time of field inquiry to indicate with evidence that the said plots belong to the alleged contemnors 2 and 3. The entire area was inundated during rainy season which disabled the officer to make a proper report.
Mr. Chattopadhyay, learned advocate for the petitioners contends that compensatory water bodies are required to be created in the same mouza where the plots, which have been utilised for purposes other than those for which it is classified in the Record of Rights, are situate. He is, presently, not in a position to support his argument by reference to the relevant law and seeks an adjournment.
We grant liberty to the Sub-Divisional Land & Land Reforms Officer, Kalyani, Nadia to conduct a further inquiry in December, 2019 after the water level of that area recedes on exit of monsoon. Endeavour shall be made to file a report, when we assemble next, regarding identification of the plots which Mr. 3 Mukherjee, learned senior advocate for the alleged contemnors 2 and 3 asserts has been utilised for creation of compensatory water bodies. ACO List the contempt application in the Combined Monthly List of January, 2020 once again.
(Arijit Banerjee, J.) (Dipankar Datta, J.)