PURNA CHANDRA PANDA Vs. REVENUE OFFICER TAKI SETTLEMENT C CAMP
LAWS(CAL)-1988-12-57
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on December 14,1988

PURNA CHANDRA PANDA Appellant
VERSUS
REVENUE OFFICER TAKI SETTLEMENT C CAMP Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) IN this writ petition the adjudication made by the Revenue Officer in a case being Case No. 277 under section 6 (1) of the West Bengal Estate Acquisition Act on. 16th April, 1969 is under challenge.
(2.) IT appears that the petitioner who is an intermediary within the meaning of West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act had exercised his option of retention by filing a return in Form 'b' and admittedly he retained 6. 65 acres of agricultural lands. The Revenue Officer in disposing of the said Case No. 277 under section 6 (1) of the said Act by the order dated 16th April, 1969 allowed him to retain 6. 65 acres of agricultural lands and. 22 decimals of non-agricultural lands. The remaining lands, were therefore, directed to be vested. The petitioner has challenged such adjudication after a lapse of 10 years, in 1979 on the ground that although he exercised his choice for 6. 65 acres of agricultural land, the revenue Officer on his own should nave allowed him to retain the remaining 18. 35 acres of lend so as to allow the intermediary to retain 25 acres of agricultural land which is the maximum limit permissible upon the Act.
(3.) IN my view, it cannot be contended by an intermediary that all though himself exercise and option to retain some lands not up to the maximum permissible under the Act for a particular category of land, the concerned Revenue Officer on his own must allow him to retain lands of different categories upto the maximum ceiling prescribed under the Act. Section 6 (1) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act indicates that notwithstanding anything contained in Sections 4 and 5. an intermediary shall be entitled to retain with effect from the date of vesting different categories of lands to the extent of ceiling indicated under various clauses of section 6 (1 ). Section 6 (5) however indicates that where an intermediary has failed to exercise his choice, the Revenue. Officer shall after giving him an opportunity of being heard allow him to retain so much of lands as do not exceed the limit of clauses (c), (d)and (j) of section 6 (1 ).;


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