DEBASISH KAR GUPTA,J. - (1.) This writ application is directed against an order dated January 10, 2018 passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal, 1st Bench, in the original application. By virtue of the order impugned to this writ application, the parties to the above proceeding were directed to exchange affidavits in respect of the original application. Though the learned Tribunal placed the miscellaneous application arising out of the above original application for hearing on the next date of hearing along with the original application but no interim relief was granted to the petitioners/applicants.
(2.) The subject matter of challenge in the original application was an order dated November 2, 2017 passed by the statutory appellate authority under Section 54 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955. By the above order, which was impugned to the original application, the appellate authority allowed the appeal of the respondent No.6 by setting aside the order passed by the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer on June 22, 2016 correcting the record of right in respect of the one?seventh share of the land in question in favour of the respondent No.7, without disposing of the application for addition of party filed by the petitioners.
(3.) It is submitted by Mr. Shaktinath Mukherjee, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners/applicants, that though the petitioners stepped into the shoes of the respondent No.7 by way of purchasing one?seventh share of the land in question their prayer for addition of party was not considered by the statutory appellate authority while disposing of the above statutory appeal. That was the subject matter of challenge in the original application. According to the petitioners, unless an interim relief is granted in favour of the petitioners who have stepped into the shoes of the respondent No.7 with regard to one?seventh share of the land in question they may suffer irreparable loss and injury in the event of any change in the nature and character of the land in question or in creation of any third party interest during the pendency of the above original application. So, according to the petitioners, the balance of convenience and/or inconvenience was in favuor of granting an interim relief in their favour.;