1

IN THE WEST BENGAL LAND

REFORMS AND TENANCY
TRIBUNAL, BLOCK-EE, 3 & 3/1,
SECTOR-II, BIDHAN NAGAR,
KOLKATA – 700 091

O.A. No.2707 of 2011 (LRTT)

In the matter of:

An application under Section 6 read with

Section 10 of the West Bengal Land
Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal Act,
1997;

And

In the matter of:

Asim Kumar Das …………. Applicant

Versus

The State of West Bengal & Ors

……………. Respondents

APPLICATION

NAMRATA DAS
Advocate
C/o. Nibaran Das
Advocate
Bar Association, Room No.5,
High Court, Calcutta.
 2

RESIDENCE & CHAMBER

NAMRATA DAS 51/2, Brojen Mukherjee Road,
B.A., LL.B., Advocate Behala, Kolkata-700 034
HIGH COURT, CALCUTTA  : (033) 2447 4616
Bar Association, Room No.5 Mobile : 9051820575

Date: 05.03.2012
To
1) The State of West Bengal, service through the Secretary, Department of Land and Land
Reforms, Writers’ Building, Kolkata-700 001.
2) Sub-Divisional Land and Land Reforms Officer, Contai, P.O. – Contai, District – Purba
Medinipur.
3) Sub-Divisional Officer, Contai, P.O. – Contai, District – Purba Medinipur.
4) Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Khejuri-II, P.O.- Janka, District - Purba Medinipur.
5) Harihar Das, 6) Gopal Chandra Das, 7) Gobinda Des,
(5) to (7) are sons of late Birendra Nath Das and all are residing at Village and P.O. – Janka, P.S.
– Khejuri, District – Purba Medinipur
8) Smt. Sunanda Mondal, wife of Sankar Mondal, Village – Kamdebnagar, P.O.-Kalagachhia,
P.S.- Khejuri, District – Purba Medinipur.
9) Smt. Dayamanti Rana, wife of Bimal Rana, Village – Sherchak, P.O. – Janka, District – Purba
Medinipur.
10) Smt. Rumpa Das (Mondal), wife of Sanjib Mondal, residing at Village and P.O- Kasaria, P.S.
– Khejuri, District – Purba Medinipur.

O.A No.2707 of 2011 (LRTT)

Asim Kumar Das ……………… Applicant.
-Vs-
State of West Bengal & Ors …… Respondents.

Dear Madam / Sir,

Enclosed please find herewith a Xerox copy of the Xerox certified copy of the order dated
23.2.2012 passed by the Hon’ble Chairman and Mr.C.R.Das, Administrative Member of the Learned
Land Tribunal in connection with the above case which will speak for itself.
That a case being RAL case No.416/1089/(H)/1983 was filed before the concerned authority
whereby the said RAL case was disposed of. That the applicant preferred an appeal in Case No.12 of
1995 before the appellate authority whereby the appellate authority by order dated 13.7.2011 was
pleased to remand the matter. That the order of remand was challenged before the learned Tribunal
but in the mean time Block Land and Land Reforms Officer initiated the proceedings as per order of
remand, but the proceeding being the order of remand although was heard by the Block Land and
Land Reforms Officer, but no final order was passed.
However, the learned Land Tribunal by order dated 29.2.2012 was pleased to direct the
special order of the West Bengal Restoration of Alienated Act, 1973 to dispose within a period of 2
months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order dated 29.2.2012 if not already disposed of
after giving notice to all the private respondents by writing down a reasoned order to that effect.
Applicant has been directed to serve copy of the order dated 29.2.2012 along with copy of the
application and all its annexures upon the concerned authority within 15 days from the date of receipt
 3

of the copy of this order. Accordingly, I am sendng herewith a copy of the order and its application to
that effect.
Yours faithfully,

Enc: As above Advocate

 4

IN THE WEST BENGAL LAND REFORMS AND TENANCY TRIBUNAL, BLOCK-EE, 3 &
3/1, SECTOR-II, BIDHAN NAGAR, KOLKATA – 700 091
O.A. No.2707 of 2011 (LRTT)
In the matter of:
An application under Section 6 read with
Section 10 of the West Bengal Land
Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal Act,
1997;
And
In the matter of:
Asim Kumar Das …………. Applicant
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors
……………. Respondents
INDEX
Sl.No. Description of Documents Annexures Pages
1. Application
2. Xerox copy of the registered Deed dated “A”
25.7.1980
3. Xerox copy of the order passed in RAL Case “B”
No.416/1089/(H)/83
4. Xerox copy of the Memo of Appeal in R.Appeal “C”
No.12/95
5. Xerox copy of the order of stay dated 4.7.95 in “D”
R.Appeal No.12/95
6. Xerox copy of the notice in R.Appeal fixing the “E”
date of hearing on 14.8.95
7. Xerox copy of the notice dated 28.10.1999 of “F”
the S.D.L.& L.R.O. Contai, in RA No.12/95
8. Xerox copy of the order dated 31.8.2010 in “G”
O.A.No.1967 of 2010 (LRTT)
9. Xerox copy of the order dated 13.7.2011 passed “H”
by the Appellate Authority in RA No.12/95
For use in Tribunal Offices:
Date of FilingRegistration No. ____________________
Signature of Applicant
____________________
Signature of Registrar
 5

IN THE WEST BENGAL LAND REFORMS AND TENANCY TRIBUNAL, BLOCK-EE, 3 &
3/1, SECTOR-II, BIDHAN NAGAR, KOLKATA – 700 091
O.A. No.2707 of 2011 (LRTT)

In the matter of:

An application under Section 6 read with Section 10 of

the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal

Act, 1997;

1. DETAILS OF THE APPLICANT:

Asim Kumar Das, son of Ananta Kumar Das residing at

Village and Post Office – Janka, Police Station –

Khejuri, District – Purba Medinipur, now residing at

Jalalkhanbar, Post Office and Police Station – Contai,

District – Purba Medinipur.

2. PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENTS:

1. The State of West Bengal, service through the Secretary,

Department of Land and Land Reforms, Writers’

Building, Kolkata – 700 001.

2. Sub-Divisional Land and Land Reforms Officer, Contai,

P.O. – Contai, District – Purba Medinipur.

3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Contai, P.O. – Contai, District –

Purba Medinipur.

4. Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Khejuri-II, P.O.-

Janka, District - Purba Medinipur.

5. Harihar Das
 6

6. Gopal Chandra Das

7. Gobinda Das

All are sons of late Birendra Nath Das and all are

residing at Village and P.O. – Janka, P.S. – Khejuri,

District – Purba Medinipur

8. Smt. Sunanda Mondal, wife of Sankar Mondal, Village

– Kamdebnagar, P.O.-Kalagachhia, P.S.- Khejuri,

District – Purba Medinipur.

9. Smt. Dayamanti Rana, wife of Bimal Rana, Village –

Sherchak, P.O. – Janka, District – Purba Medinipur.

10. Smt. Rumpa Das (Mondal), wife of Sanjib Mondal,

residing at Village and P.O- Kasaria, P.S. – Khejuri,

District – Purba Medinipur.

3. PARTICULARS OF THE CASE AGAINST WHICH THIS APPLICATION

IS MADE:

a) Despite being prima facie satisfied that the transferor had no eligibility to make any

application under Section 4 of the West Bengal Restoration of Alienated Land Act, 1973 yet the

Appellate Authority remanded back for fresh hearing.

b) When the Appellate Authority has dealt with the issues in its pros and cons and satisfied that

the transferor does not come under the purview of the Restoration of Alienated Land Act, so the

question of remand is unnecessary and abuse of process of law.

c) When the Appellate Authority on being prima facie satisfied from all corner being Deed of

Sale itself, depositions itself, written statements and own admission of the transferor as to non-
 7

maintainability of the application, to remand the matter for further adjudication is nothing but

gross abuse of power and process.

4. JURISDICTION OF THE TRIBUNAL:

That the applicant declares that each and every part of the facts or the cause of action including

the subject matter of the application by which this application is made within the jurisdiction of

the Hon’ble Tribunal within the provision of Section 7 of this Act.

5. LIMITATION:

That the applicant declares that this matter is not barred by the provision of limitation of the

Hon’ble Tribunal in accordance within the Section 10 of the West Bengal Land Reforms and

Tenancy Tribunal Act, 1997.

6. FACTS OF THE CASE:

6.1. Applicant is the lawful recorded owner in respect of plot no.1262 area .04 decimal of mouza

Janka under P.S. Khejuri, of District – Purba Medinipur. That the nature and character of the

land classified as bastu so your applicant is in possession of the said land by preparing

Garden and trees etc. in respect of the land. Applicant categorically states that till today he is

in actual physical possession of the said land.

6.2. Applicant states that originally the said land belongs to one Birndra Nath Das who made a

registered deed of sale in favour of the applicant on 25.7.1980 with proper consideration.

That on and from the date of purchase the applicant got actual physical possession of the said

land. Xerox copy of the deed of purchase is annexed hereto and marked with letter “A”.

6.3. That the father of the respondent No.5 to 10 out of greediness made an application for

restoration of the land under the provision of the West Bengal Restoration of Alienated Land

Act, 1973 before the Special Officer being the Junior Land Reforms Officer, Henria. That the

said case was registered as RAL Case No.416/1089(H)/83.

 8

6.4. Applicant states that the Special Officer being the B.L.& L.R.O. Khejuri-II, District – Purba

Medinipur by his order dated 10.4.1995 allowed the application under Section 4(1) of the

Bengal Restoration of Alienated Land Act, 1973 and an order of restoration was passed.

Xerox copy of the proceeding in RAL Case No.416/1089(H)/83 is annexed hereto and

marked with letter “B”.

6.5. Applicant states that he preferred an appeal being RA appeal Case No.12/95 before the

Appellate Authority being the Sub-Divisional Officer, Contai, District – Purba Medinipur.

Xerox copy of the memo of appeal in RA Appeal Case No.12/95 is annexed hereto and

marked with letter “C”.

6.6. That your applicant also made an application for stay of the order of the Special Officer and

on 4.7.1995 the Appellate Authority passed an order of stay. It is to be stated that at no pont

of time the transferor obtained possession of the land. Xerox copy of the stay order is

annexed hereto and marked with letter “D”.

6.7. Applicant states that the Appellate authority issued notice to the parties by fixing the date of

hearing on 14.8.1995 and your applicant duly appeared before the said Appellate Authority.

Xerox copy of the notice is annexed hereto and marked with letter “E”.

6.8. Applicant states that due to the policy of the authority, the RA appeal Case No.12/95 was

transferred to the Court of the another appellate authority being before the Sub-Divisional

Land and Land Reforms Officer, Contai, District – Purba Medinipur. That your applicant also

received notice from the office of the respondent No.2 when the said respondent fixed the

date of hearing on 9.11.1999. Xerox copy of the notice issued from the office of the

respondent No.2 is annexed hereto and marked with letter “F”.

6.9. Applicant states that due to inordinate delay in disposing of the appeal case for last 12 years,

the applicant moved an application before the Learned Land Tribunal which was registered as
 9

O.A. No.1967/2010 (LRTT). That by order dated 31.8.2010, the Learned Tribunal was

pleased to dispose of the appeal within 6 months from the date of receiving the order in

accordance law. That certain other directions were also passed. Xerox copy of the order dated

31.8.2010 is annexed hereto and marked with letter “G”.

6.10. Applicant states that despite receipt of the order of the learned Tribunal, the Appellate

Authority did not comply with the same and for which contempt application being MA

414/2010 was filed. As soon as the Appellate Authority received the notice of the contempt a

hearing was given to the parties and passed an order of remand on 13.7.2011 without any

basis. Xerox copy of the order dated 13.7.2011 is annexed hereto and marked with letter

“H”.

6.11. Applicant states that the concerned Appellate Authority raised five issues which are:-

1. Whether the land was sold due to distress or not?

2. Whether the grounds taken in the Deed of Sale is to be considered as a

distress sale deed or not?

3. Whether on the date of sale dated 5.8.1980, the transferor had land

more that 2 hectors?

4. Whether the admission of the transferor as to possessed land more than

2 hectors so the provision of the Act attracts or not?

5. Whether from the various deeds sold by the transferor it can be

presumed that the transferor had lands exceeding 2 hectors?

6.12. Applicant states that under the West Bengal Restoration of Alienated Act, 1973 the basic

principles have been laid down mainly on three points:-

a) Whether the land so transferred caused by distress sale or not?

 10

b) Whether there is any talk of oral or documents of re-conveyance?

c) Whether on the date of sale the transferor had land exceeding 2

hectors?

Applicant craves leave of this Hon’ble Court to procure the Act and its related criteria

for restoration of land transfer/ sold in distress at the time of hearing of the said application.

6.13. Applicant states and submits that the Appellate Authority as per his best wisdom and

knowledge has held that the sale deed in question is not a distress one because the ground of

transfer was to purchase land at Orissa . To that regard the Hon’ble Apex Court as also the

Hon’ble High Court held that the recitals of the deed should be considered. The Appellate

Authority considered all the issues and there remains nothing, so the question of remand does

not arise at all.

6.14. Applicant further submits that the Appellate Authority decided the main issue that on the date

of transfer whether the transferor had land exceeding 2 hectors. That the appellate authority

held that the transferor held more than 2 hectors which has been admitted by the transferor

and his wife as also the deeds goes to show that the transferor possessed 2 hectors of land.

That part in the written statement the respondents have themselves admitted that they had

lands more than 2 hectors. As such the transferor of the land in favour of the applicant is not a

distress sale. That being the position there was no necessity of sending the matter back on

remand.

6.15. Applicant further submits that when the Appellate Authority is very well satisfied that the

case in question does not come under the purview of distress sale so the question of remand

and to decide the said issues over again by the special officer is without any basis and there

cannot be any improvement of any case to traverse back from ‘no’ to ‘yes’. The Hon’ble

Apex Court as also the Hon’ble High Court have held that the question of remand occurs
 11

there where the points / issues have not been dealt with properly or where the evidences are

contrary. But in this case the appellate authority is very much satisfied that the transferor does

not come within the purview of the Act so the question of remand does not arise at all.

6.16. Unless Your Lordships held that the decisions arrived by the Appellate Authority is right and

justified so the transferor cannot maintain any application under Section 4 of the West Bengal

Restoration of Alienated Act, 1973 and unless the order of remand is set aside then your

applicant will suffer irreparable loss and injury.

7. RELIEF SOUGHT FOR WITH GROUNDS THEREIN:

I. For that the order of remand passed by the Appellate Authority is without any basis and not in

proper application of mind.

II. For that when the Appellate Authority is very much sure that the case of the transferor does

not come under the purview of Section 4 of the R.A.L. Act 1973, so the question of

remanding the matter over again does not sustain at all.

III. For that the Appellate Authority has failed to consider that when the transferor had no right to

maintain any application under the Act so to remand the same, the situation cannot itself

improve.

IV. For that in all factual aspect and in the written statement the respondents have admitted that

they possessed land exceeding 2 hectors, then the application on the ground of distress sale

does not arise at all.

V. For that the Appellate Authority has failed to consider rather …………which cases should be

remanded and which………………not be remanded. In this particular case if the …….. is

read then it will be evidently clear that the … with malafide motive the application on the

ground of distress sale, so the question of remand does not arise at all.

VI. For that the order of remand is otherwise bad and is not sustainable in law.
 12

7A In view of the facts mentioned in paragraph 6 above the applicant prays for the fowlloing

reliefs:

a) An order directing the respondent No.2 being the Appellate Authority not to remand the case

No.416/1089(H)/83 under Section 4(1) of the Restoration of Alienated Land Act, 1973 since

the Respondent Nos.5 to 10 cannot maintain any application on the ground of distress sale so

the order impugned should be modified.

b) An order that in view of the order dated 13.7.2011 passed by the Appellate Authority in R.A.

appeal Case No.12/95, since the provisions of law is wholly against the respondents No.5 to

10 so the order of remand be set aside and / or quashed.

c) A declaration that in view of Section 4 of the West Bengal Restoration of Alienated Land Act,

1973 and in view of the order dated 13.7.2011 passed by the Appellate Authority which is

being Annexure “G” to this application, the respondents No.5 to 10 cannot maintain any

application.

d) An order directing the respondent No.4 being the BL&LRO, Khejuri-II not to proceed any

further in respect of Case No.416/1089(H)/83 as per order of the Appellate Authority since

the respondents cannot maintain any application.

8. Interim order, if any, prayed for:

The applicants pray for an interim order in terms of relief(s) herein above:

a) A mandate directing the respondent No.2 being the

Appellate Authority not to give any effect of the order of remand only in respect of

Case No.416/1083(H)/83 as per order dated 13.7.2011 in R.A.Appeal Case No.12/95

since the Respondents No.5 to 10 cannot maintain any application under the

provisions of Restoration of Aleinated Land Act, 1973.

 13

b) A mandate directing the respondent No.4 not to proceed any

further in respect of Case No.416/1089(H)/83 as per order of remand passed by the

Appellate Authority in R.A.Appeal Case No.12/95 and to quash and / or cancel the

same.

9. DETAILS OF REMEDIES EXHAUSTED:

Your applicant declares that he has availed of all the remedies available to him seeking

redressal of their grievances, but no effect.

10. DECLARATION NOT PREVIOUSLY FILED OR PENDING WITH ANY

OTHER COURT:

That your applicant did not move any application before this Hon’ble Tribunal or any other

court in the self-same cause of action.

11. SERVICE MANNER:

The applicant declares that the respondents will be served with the copy of the application in

their respective address by registered post with acknowledgment due and an affidavit of

service will be affirmed and filed before the Hon’ble Tribunal at the time of hearing of the

case.

12. INDEX:

An index containing the details of the documents of enclosures is enclosed herewith.

13. LIST OF ENCLOSURES:

i) Application with Court Fees of Rs.50/-

ii) Vakalatnama with Court Fees of Rs.10/-

iii) Annexures “A” to “H”.

 14

VERIFICATION

I, Asim Kumar Das on of Ananta Kumar Das aged about 45 years by faith Hindu by occupation

service, residing at Village and Post Office- Janka, Police Station Khejuri, District – Purba

Medinipur now residing at Jalalkhanbar, Post Office and Police Station – Contai, District – Purba

Medinipur, do hereby verify that I am the applicant in the instant application and as such I know the

facts and circumstances of the case. That I have not suppressed any material fact.

1. That the statements made in paragraphs 1-5, 6.1, 6.2, 6.6—6.8, 6.10, 11, 12 and 13

are true to my knowledge and the statements made in paragraphs 6.3—6.5, 6.9 and 6.11 are

derived from source/ records/ information which I verily believe to be true and the statements made

in paragraphs 6.12—6.16, 7, 7A—10 are my respectful submissions before this

Learned Tribunal.

Prepared in my Office Deponent is known to me

Advocate

Read over, explained in Bengali

and Identified by me

Advocate

This the ………. day of

September 2011