Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Smt. Kaberi Hazra vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 21 June, 2018
Author: Harish Tandon
Bench: Harish Tandon
1
01 21.06.18 (Mentioned)
Ct No. 02
W.P. 7004 (W) of 2018
akd
Smt. Kaberi Hazra
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
--------
Mr. Ashis Kumar Sanyal, Mr. Hiranmoy Bhattacharyya, Mr. Saunak Bhattacharya, Mr. Sumitava Chakraborty.
... for the petitioner.
Mr. Kishore Dutta, Ld. Adv. Gen., Mr. Tapan Mukherjee, Mr. Manas Kundu, Mr. Soumitra Bandopadhyay, Mr. S Bandopadhyay.
... for the State.
This matter has come up before this Court after recalling the interim order passed by another Hon'ble Judge for want of determination.
Both the petitioner as well as the State makes their submissions on the interim order to be granted in the instant writ petition.
The sheet-anchor of argument advanced by Mr. Sanyal, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, that the notification under Section 4 followed by declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act is invalid and illegal on the ground of vagueness in description of the property sought to be acquired. Reliance is placed upon a judgement of this Court in case of Pramatha Nath Mukherjee & Ors. vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. reported in 70 CWN 503 and of the Supreme Court in case of Competent Authority vs. Barangore Jute Factory & Ors. reported in (2005) 13 SCC 477.
It is submitted by the learned Advocate General that the point canvassed in the instant writ petition is no longer available to the petitioner having acquiesced 2 to the acquisition proceeding by participating thereto and also by making a request to the State Government to allot an alternative plot of land. According to the learned Advocate General, even the point urged by Mr. Sanyal does not appear to be correct, as sufficient descriptions had been indicated in the said notification and declaration identifying the area of land sought to be acquired.
Since the parties are not ad idem of the factual issues, this Court feels that it would be proper that the writ petition itself should be disposed of upon exchange of affidavits.
Since all the documents pertaining to the subject matter involved in the instant writ petition are available with the learned Advocate General and in fact were placed at the time of hearing, there is no impediment on the part of the State to affirm an affidavit enclosing those documents / papers within a short span of time.
Accordingly, respondents are directed to file affidavit-in-opposition by 25th June, 2018; reply thereto, if any, be filed by 27th June, 2018.
Let the matter appear as 'Specially Fixed Matter' on 28th June, 2018 at the top in the supplementary list.
(HARISH TANDON, J.) 3