D.K.Seth, J. - (1.) The petitioner had applied for licence for holding 'haat' (market) in Plot No. 676 which he claims to belong to him by reason of the proceedings under section 6(1) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act (W. B. E. A Act) in which he was allowed to retain the said land.
(2.) Elaborate argument has been made by Mr. Panda and Mr. Anupam Chatterjee referring to the Bihar Land Reforms Act, Bihar & Bengal Transfer of Territories Act, 1956, West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, West Bengal Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act in order to drive home the point that there is no dispute with regard to the ownership of the land so far as the petitioner is concerned. He has also referred to various orders, proceedings and the record-of-rights in order to establish that he is in possession and that this land was never vested either under section 6(a) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act or West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act after it was made applicable in the year 1964 since transferred to West Bengal under the Transfer of Territories Act, 1954 from Bihar. Therefore, the ownership is not in dispute and as such, the Municipal Authority cannot refuse the licence.
(3.) In this case, the learned Counsel for the appellant, Mr. Amal Baran Chatterjee, had pointed out that pursuant to a resolution by the Regulated Market Committee, the land was proposed to be given to the Municipality and the Municipality, the appellant, was to take over possession of the said market. He raised a contention that the ownership and the possession of the writ petitioner is in dispute, which is to be established in an appropriate forum before he can claim issuance of a licence.;