Satya Brata Sinha, J. - (1.) The petitioner in this application has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs: "a) Writ in the nature of Mandamus be issued commanding the opposite parties to withdraw and/or cancel and/or rescind the order, if any, passed under section 3(1) of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948. b) Writ in the nature of Mandamus be issued for restraining the opposite parties from giving any effect or further effect to the said order, if any passed, under section 3(1) of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 and interfering with the possession of the petitioner in respect of the land being annexure B to the petition."
(2.) Admitted fact of the matter is as follows: On 21.4.67 the petitioner purchased plot No. 1789 in Mouza- Manoharpur. From the affidavit in opposition filed by the State respondents, it appears that immediately after purchase, the petitioner mortgaged the property in favour of his predecessor-in interest, namely, Hariram Sardar and Balaram Sardar and the possession remained with them. Allegedly, on 7.1.82 pursuant to notification dated 2.1.82 issued under subsection (1) of section 3 of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948, possession had been taken. It is further the case of the respondents that only in the year 1983 the petitioner obtained possession of the land in question presumably after the mortgage was redeemed. The petitioner applied for mutation on 17.4.84 and it appears from annexure B to the writ petition that a Parcha had been issued in his name in respect of the plot in question on or about 10.12.85. The respondents, in their affidavit in opposition, have also admitted that although in the original record of rights which was finally published in the year 1958 names of the petitioners predecessors-in-interest, Hariram and Balaram appear, in the revisional settlement record of rights name of the petitioner appears at the attestation stage and an entry had been made therein that he had purchased the land by reason of a registered deed of sale dated 25.4.67 being deed no. 2080, although the land in question had been requisitioned for the West Bengal Housing Board.
(3.) The petitioner filed this writ application 20.5.86. It appears from the records that a notice had been issued by the learned counsel for the petitioner to the Land Acquisition Officer about filing of the writ application on or about 22.5.86, and from the order sheet No. 72 dated 4.6.86, it appears that receipt of the said notice had been recorded and the L.R. was requested to engage a State Advocate to contest the case. An information was also requested to be sent to the requisitioning authority. A public notice under subsection (1) of section 5 of Act. II was directed to be displayed at a convenient place on 19.11.86 and a notice under subsection (3) of section 5 of the said Act was issued on 25.11.86. From the records, it appears that on 25.2.87, an award of compensation was served on the erstwhile owner of the land, Hariram and Balaram. Admittedly, when the writ application was filed, an interim order of status quo as regards possession of the parties was passed. According to the respondents themselves they did not suffer any prejudice by reason of the said order, as they had been in possession of the land in question, in terms of the possession certificates issued in their favour, pursuant to the notice requisitioning the lands.;