Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Akd vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 19 September, 2022
Author: Harish Tandon
Bench: Harish Tandon
68 19.09.22 WPLRT 57 of 2022
Ct. No. 04
Indo Finance Pvt. Ltd.
Akd Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
--------
Mr. Saptangshu Basu, Mr. Supratim Dhar, Mr. Md. Ali Ahasan.
... for the petitioner.
Mr. Chandi Charan De, Mr. Soumitra Bandyopadhyay, Mr. Anirban Sarkar.
... for the State.
Mr. Malay Kumar Ghosh, Mr. Kallol Basu, Mr. Puspendu Chakraborty.
... for the respondent no. 4.
The respondent no. 4 approached the Thika Controller seeking an adjudication of its status as thika tenant, which was eventually allowed. The order of the Thika Controller was challenged before the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal and by the impugned order the order of the Thika Controller was set aside and the entire proceeding was remanded upon framing the issues/points to be reconsidered and decided by the Thika Controller. The petitioner has challenged the order of the Tribunal on the premise that there was no necessity of sending the matter on remand after framing the issues/points, which could have been conveniently decided by the Tribunal itself on the basis of the available materials on record.
The interesting point, which is involved in the instant writ petition, is whether the respondent no. 4 can claim the status of a thika tenant when, in fact, it was inducted into the property on the basis of the deed of lease containing a period of twenty years with the extension/renewal clause. Another ancillary point, which in our opinion, has cropped up whether the 2 Thika Controller is vested with the power to decide the complex issues on the status of the parties under the relevant Act applicable in this regard. The respective Counsels have prayed for fixing the matter after the ensuing vacation. It has been pointed out by the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner that in the event the matter is taken up after Puja vacation, there is a possibility that the Thika Controller may proceed with the matter after remand and if the proceeding is disposed of before the aforesaid points are decided by this Court, it may cause an anomalous situation and may probably render the instant writ petition infructuous. In view of the above, we feel that an interim order is required to be passed in the form of injunction restraining the Thika Controller from proceeding with the matter sent to it after remand for a period of ten weeks from date or until further order/orders of this Court, whichever is earlier.
Let the matter appear two weeks after reopening of this Court following Puja vacation under the heading 'For Orders' in the supplementary list.
(Harish Tandon, J.) (Prasenjit Biswas, J.) 3