GUNADHAR MAJHI & ORS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL ORS
LAWS(CAL)-2003-4-72
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on April 30,2003

GUNADHAR MAJHI And ORS Appellant
VERSUS
State Of West Bengal Ors Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Amitava Lala, J. - (1.) From the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in presence of the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, it appear that the matter of determination of compensation before the Additional District Judge is pending for quite sometime but no step has been taken by such Additional District Judge on a plea that he is powerless in passing such order. According to me, there is a falacy (fallacy ?) of observation of the Additional Dist. Judge to such extent. Had there been a position to the proper understanding of Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 there would not have been such a situation. Section 18 of the Act speaks about the determination of the Court when the matter of compensation has been referred by the Collector. Section 18 of the Act never says that the matter is to be referred to the Dist. Judge alone. The Court comprises of the District Judge as well as the Additional Dist. Judge for the sake of administrative of justice on the basis of the number of litigations pending. Therefore, the Dist. Judge has entrusted the Additional Dist. Judge by virtue of an administrative order. It is as good as assigning the matter by the Dist. Judge within the four corners of Section 18 of the Act and in such a case if no order is passed taking such a plea, it would be tantamount to denial of justice. Therefore, it cannot be accepted that the Additional Judge, in such situation, cannot take up this matter of adjudication on the basis of the reference by the Collector if he is entrusted by the District Judge. However, since it is clarified by the Court, the Additional Dist. Judge is entitled to proceed with this -matter as expeditiously as possible. Since a considerable period has already elapsed in view of slich situation, it could have been ascertained long before by the Additional Dist. Judge himself. Had there been any confusion in the mind of such additional Dist. Judge, he could have consulted with the Dist. Judge as an administrative problem or could have released the matter so that the Dist. Judge should have assigned the matter to any other Judge.
(2.) Under such circumstances, the Additional Dist. Judge is not debarred from taking any decision in this respect in view of the clarification of this Court. Therefore, a request is made to him to expedite the matter and finalise the same as early as possible.
(3.) Thus, the writ petition stands disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.