JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition is directed against an order passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms & Tenancy Tribunal, 1st Bench, on 8th April, 2014 in tribunal application being O.A. 861 of 2014 (LRTT) at the instance of the writ petitioners who were applicants before the Learned instant case.
(2.) THE applicants ' society was the settlee in respect of Jiaganj Azimganj Sadar Ferry Ghat Service for the year 1420 B.S. Before expiry of the lease term on 31st Chaitra, 1420 B.S, the writ petitioners/applicants filed an application before the District Land & Land Reforms Officer, Murshidabad, on 29th January, 2014 praying for settlement of the aforesaid ferry service in their favour as per provision contained in Rule 281 of the West Bengal Land & Land Reforms Manual, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as the said manual) during the year 1421 B.S. The authority concerned, without considering the petitioner 's said application, issued one notice on 13th February, 2014 inviting tender from the intending boatmen 's cooperative society/partnership concern stating therein that the said ferry service will be settled on 4th March, 2014 subject to the terms and conditions as mentioned in the said auction notice. Pursuant to such notice inviting tender, the writ petitioners herein, along with two other cooperative societies, including the private respondent no. 5 herein, participated in the said tender process by offering their bid in sealed cover. Immediately after coming to know that no other boatmen 's cooperative society and/or partnership concern, excepting petitioners ' cooperative society participated in the said tender process, the petitioners herein on the very day of holding such tender, wrote a letter to the concerned District Land & Land Reforms Officer, Murshidabad, inviting him to select the petitioners ' cooperative society for grant of such settlement for the next three years as the petitioners ' society was the only boatmen 's cooperative society operating ferry service in the said locality. The concerned authority, even without considering the said application submitted on 3rd March, 2014, ultimately selected the respondent no. 5 cooperative society for grant of such settlement for one year. The petitioners, thus, felt aggrieved. Hence, they filed a tribunal application being O.A. 861 of 2014 (LRTT) for challenging the said action of the concerned District Land & Land Reforms Officer before the West Bengal Land Reforms & Tenancy Tribunal. The Learned Tribunal after considering the respective contention of the parties disposed of the petitioners ' said application on 8th April, 2014 by dismissing it and holding, inter alia, that the concerned authority did not commit any illegality in selecting the respondent no. 5 as according to the Learned Tribunal, the respondent no. 5 being the boatmen 's cooperative society, its eligibility to participate in the said tender process, cannot be overlooked. For coming to the conclusion that the respondent no. 5 is a boatmen 's cooperative society, the Learned Tribunal considered the bye -laws of the society wherein it was mentioned that 'Ghat Parapar ', i.e. to provide ferry service is one of the activities of the said cooperative society amongst other multifarious activities.
(3.) THE Learned Tribunal also held that when the concerned authority decided to float tender for selection of a suitable co -operative society for running the said ferry service and issued notice inviting tender from willing candidates, it will be presumed that the petitioners ' application for settlement of ferry service for the year 1421 B.S. by following the provision contained in Rule 281 of the said Rules, and without floating any tender, was deemed to have been rejected. As such, the Learned Tribunal held that even though the decision for rejection of the petitioners ' prayer for settlement of the ferry service with them for the year 1421 B.S. was not communicated to the petitioners, but such lapse on the part of the State authority cannot vitiate the process of settlement. Holding as such, the Learned Tribunal rejected the petitioners ' said tribunal application. ;