Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
In Re: Chittaranjan Bhattacharjee vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 16 May, 2011
Author: Soumitra Pal
Bench: Soumitra Pal
1
.5.2011
W.P. 8017 (W) of 2011
In re: Chittaranjan Bhattacharjee ... Petitioner
Vs.
State of West Bengal & Ors. ... Respondents
Mr. N. C. Bihani Mr. Somen Bose Mr. Debasish Chatterjee ... for the petitioner Mr. Sandip Srimani Mrs. Chhabi Chakraborty ... for the State Let affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept on record. In the writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the respondents, particularly on the Land Manager and Officer-on-Special Duty and Ex-Officio Deputy Secretary, Urban Development Department, Salt Lake City, Kolkata, the respondent no.3, to mutate his name as lessee in respect of premises no. BC-226, Sector-I, Salt Lake City, Kolkata.
It appears from the petition that the Governor of the State of West Bengal by a deed of lease executed on 14th November, 1972 allotted a plot of land being Plot No.266 in Block No.BC, Sector-I, Salt Lake City, Kolkata in the name of Nepal Chandra Rai Sircar, since deceased. Thereafter, the said Nepal Chandra Rai Sircar, since deceased, constructed a two storied building on the said plot of land. The said Nepal Chandra Rai Sircar, since deceased, on 14th January, 1993 executed his last Will and Testament in favour of the petitioner in respect of the said premises. The said Nepal Chandra Rai Sircar expired on 7th March, 1999. It appears that the petitioner applied for Probate of the last Will and Testament of late Nepal Chandra Rai Sircar which was granted by the learned Court of District Delegate, Barasat, North 24-Parganas in Misc. Case No. 218/08 (Probate) on 4th January, 2011. After Probate was granted, the petitioner by letter dated 4th March, 2011 intimated the respondent no.3 about the same and requested for mutating his name in respect of the said premises. Thereafter, as no action was taken, on 7th April, 2011, a reminder was sent to the said respondent. Since, according to the petitioner, despite the representation and the reminder no action has been taken, aggrieved this writ petition has been filed.
2Having heard the learned advocates for the parties, since the applications dated 4th March, 2011 and 7th April, 2011 for mutating the name of the petitioner are pending before the respondent no.3, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the said respondent to dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order to be communicated to the petitioner within eight weeks from the date of presenting the certified copy of this order after giving an opportunity of hearing and after verifying the records and after causing an inspection of the premises in question either personally or through an officer duly authorized.
I make it clear that I have not gone into the merits of the case and all points are left open to be dealt with by the respondent no.3.
There will be no order as to costs.
Let urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the appearing parties on priority basis.
( Soumitra Pal, J.)