Amiya Kumar Mookerji, J. - (1.) This Rule is directed against an order of requisition passed by the Land Requisition Collector of premises No. 104, Shyania Prosad Mukherjee Road.
(2.) Petitioner nos. 1 to 3 are the owners and petitioner no. 4 is a lessee in respect of the said premises.
(3.) There is a scheme for construction of Mass Rapid Transit System in the city of Calcutta. The implementation of the said scheme has already been taken in hand and the State Government of West Bengal has been authorised to acquire land in the city of Calcutta for the purpose of construction of the Mass Rapid Transit System and other connected works relating to the said system from Dum Durn to Tollygunge. The petitioners challenge a notification dated 2.11.72 under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as well as the declaration dated 29.11.73 made under section 6 of the said Act. It is the case of the petitioners that the premises sought to be acquired, a marble Ganesh Bigraha (deity) being the family deity was installed permanently inside the temple. In front of the temple there is a "Mondap, and occasionally in the said Mondap - the assembly floor is allowed to be used for marriage, Upanayan and Annaprasan ceremonies at the compelling requests of the local people. Even Durga Puja was held in the said assembly floor being organised by local youths. According to the petitioners, the whole of the land sought to be acquired is a religious place. On March 28, 1973 petitioner no. 4 was served with a copy of the notification made under section 4(1) of the Act relating to the proposed acquisition of a portion of premises no-104, Shynnn Prosad Mukherjee Road and in the said notice the petitioner was informed that the last date of filing objections thereto was April 17, 1973. Thereafter petitioner no. 4 contacted the Land Acquisition Collector for the purpose of inspection of the records of the case and with his leave petitioner no. 4 was allowed to take out a pencil copy of the rough sketch of the plan. The said petitioner requested the Land Acquisition Collector to allow him to look into the Master Plan and the sanctioned scheme relating to the Mass Rapid Transit System, but he was told that the Master Plan and the scheme would not be available. There was hearing of the objection under section 5A of the Act. Sometime in early November 1973 Respondent No. 5, the Land Acquisition Collector, submitted his report containing his recommendations on the objections under section 5A. Petitioner took short notes of the said report. It is stated in the said report that there is a Ganesh Mondap on the west of the disputed land and the entire vacant portion is not used for Ganesh Puja. A portion of the vacant land is used for commercial purposes ; at the time of inspection there was a marriage ceremony being held. So, the portion covering Ganesh Mondap is to be left out of acquisition. Subsequently there was a declaration on 29.11.73 under section 6 of the Act. The petitioners being aggrieved by the impugned notice and the proceedings under section 5A of the Act coved this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution and obtained the present Rule.;