SOUMITRA PAL,J. - (1.) Affidavit of service filed today be kept on record.
(2.) In the writ petition the petitioners have challenged the memo dated 21st March, 1997 issued by the Competent Authority, Barrackpore under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act 1976, North 24 Parganas, the respondent no.1 and have prayed for a direction upon the said respondent to consider his representation dated 28th December, 2011. It is submitted that the impugned memo dated 21st March, 1997 is illegal as the petitioners do not hold excess land under section 2 (q)(I) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. Moreover, as no proper notice was issued and no hearing was granted, the impugned memo is illegal and cannot be acted upon. Submission is the petitioners could not come up earlier as there was change of constitution of the company. Reliance has been placed on the law laid down by the Apex Court in paragraph 6 of the judgement in State of Maharashtra and another v. B.E. Billimoria and others : (2003) 7 SCC 336 and in the judgement in Madhumita Das v. The University of Calcutta and others : 2004 (1) CLJ (Cal) 453 in support of the submission. Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate for the petitioner relying on the statements made in the writ petition submits that in this backdrop the representation dated 28th December, 2011 requires consideration.
(3.) Mr. Das, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the State submits, that the judgements relied on by the petitioners are not applicable to the facts of the case since assuming the petitioner has come up within the period of limitation as it is an appealable order under section 12 of the 1976 Act, the writ petition is not maintainable. Since the writ petitioner did not prefer appeal within thirty days from the date of receipt of the said order, order has become final. Since it is evident from the memo dated 23rd October, 2002 issued by the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Barrackpore-II, North 24 Parganas that an area of 451.16 sq. mts. had already vested which the petitioners have admitted in the letter dated 23rd December, 2010, no order may be passed. Therefore, it is submitted that the writ petition is not maintainable and also without merit.;