Arijit Banerjee, J. - (1.) By consent of the parties, the appeal and the application for stay are taken up for hearing together.
(2.) The lands that were acquired by the authorities admittedly included the lands belonging to the writ petitioners/appellants. The writ petitioners approached the learned Single Judge with the grievance that no compensation has been paid to them. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition solely on the ground of delay on the part of the petitioners in approaching Court. The learned Judge held that the award was published in 1979 and the petitioners having approached the Court after 36 years, they are not entitled to any relief. Being aggrieved, the writ petitioners are before us by way of the present appeal.
(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute that the lands of the appellants being Plot No. 1088 (area 0.08 acre), Plot No. 1811 (area 0.35 acre) and Plot No. 1812 (area 0.02 acre) of Mouza-Khanberia, District-South 24- Parganas were acquired pursuant to acquisition case initiated under Act-II of 1948. However, from the records produced by learned counsel for the State, it could not be shown that the predecessor-in-interest of the writ petitioners/appellants was also an awardee. It could not be shown that the predecessor of the appellants received compensation. Learned counsel submits that no further records are available and he is not in a position to throw any further light on the matter.;