PROTIK PRAKASH BANERJEE,J. - (1.) The factual matrix of this case has been stated in precis in my order dated June 19, 2018. I do not repeat it. All I say is that there must be a mechanism to instruct high officers of the State of West Bengal who hail from the Indian Administrative Service and are serving at the level of Collectors of the districts, in both law and English. I have not found such pervasive and obstinate ignorance even when the meaning of the words in the context of the applicable law has been laid down in more than one judgement of this court.
(2.) Briefly, the entire grievance of the writ petitioner was that the authorities concerned refused to accept any application for referring the dispute relating to enhancement of compensation for structures on land which were acquired for the purpose of a national highway, under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956, on the purported ground that only the compensation determined for the acquisition of the land and not the structure, could be referred to arbitration. This is the effect of the express pleadings contained in paragraphs 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the writ petition.
(3.) So that this executive obstinacy is not continued, while allowing the writ petition to the extent mentioned below, I propose to once again reiterate the matters of record and the position of law.;