SK KENARAM Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) A proceeding under section 49 (2) of the West bengal Land Reforms Act has been started against the petitioner on the allegation that the patta settlement In his favour was "obtained through mistake. " The Sub-divisional Officer, Diamond Harbour, who as the Revenue Officer under section 49 (2)of the said Act issued the impugned notice (Annexure 'a') did not give any particular of the said alleged mistake by which putta settlement was obtained by the petitioner. According to the petitioner, inspite of his prayer the Sub-divisional Officer did not furnish the said particulars. The impugned enquiry under section 49 (2) of the West bengal Land Reforms Act is a quasi judicial one and the person whose settlement is proposed to be cancelled under section 49 (2) of the West Bengal Land Reforms act ought to be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing. Unless the person proceeded against under section 49 (2) is informed of the grounds on which the settlement in his favour was proposed to be annulled, he cannot effectively contest the;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.