BIPIN BEHARI MUKHERJEE & ORS. Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
LAWS(CAL)-1977-2-26
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on February 15,1977

BIPIN BEHARI MUKHERJEE And ORS. Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Chittatosh Mookherjee, J. - (1.) The petitioners 1 and 2 and their deceased elder brother, Chintaharan Mukherjee, are alleged to be the owners of a brick-field situated at Village Krishnanagar, P. S. Maheshtala, Dist. 24-Parganas. In the record of rights the lands comprised in the said brick field were classified as 'Itkhola' and the status of the tenants has been recorded as 'Dakhalkars'. According to the petitioners the said brick field is situated by the side of the river Hooghly and bricks are manufactured solely with the silt deposited on their lands by the water of the said adjoining river. The petitioners claim that they do not excavate or dig or use any earth or clay for the manufacture of bricks.
(2.) The Additional District Magistrate, Alipore, the respondent No. 2 issued notices upon the petitioners dated 6th April , 1971 to show cause why actions should not be taken against them under sub-section (2B) of Section 4 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 for manufacturing bricks for the purpose of business without the previous permission in writing under sub-section (2A) of Section 4 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 (vide Annexure 'A' series to the writ petition). The petitioners had showed cause to the Additional District Magistrate (Estate Acquisition) against the same. They Inter-alia stated that the lands in question were not agricultural lands and, therefore, the provisions of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act were not attracted to the facts of the case. The petitioners further stated that they had been recorded as 'Dakhalkars' and the recorded purpose of the tenancy was 'Itkhola' both in the C. S. and R. S. records. They also stated that they carried on business of brick making with the silt deposited by the river Hooghly and they did not quarry sand or dig or use earth or clay of their holding. They denied that they had committed any breach of sub-section (2A) of Section 4 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act. The petitioners took several other points in their said show-cause petition.
(3.) The Additional District Magistrate (Estate Acquisition), 24-Parganas by his order dated 9th September, 1971 accepted the submission of the petitioners that the status of the tenants of the disputed lands had been recorded as 'Dakhalkars' and that the lands had been classified as 'Itkhola'. Hence he ordered that petitioners were not guilty under Section 4(2A) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, but he further ordered "as per provision of Sub-Rule 4(A) of Rule 3(B) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Rules, 1965, the opposite party shall apply for mining lease under the West Bengal Minor Mineral Rules, 1959 within a period of 1 1/2 months from the date of this order" (vide Annexure 'C' to the writ petition.).;


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