One appeal was filed by the State, along with respondents 2 and 4, and the other, by the Farmers Society, the 3rd respondent herein.
On or about March 21, 1955, the Society submitted a development scheme and the Collector issued numberice, under r. 5 2 of the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Rules, 1948 hereinafter referred to as the Rules , inviting objections, within the time specified therein, to the scheme being sanctioned.
On September 13,1956, the appellant Mills filed, in the Calcutta High Court, a writ petition, Civil Rule No.
This declaration was signed by the Deputy Secretary, Land and Revenue Department, Government of West Bengal.
The objections filed by the appellant Mills, to the sanctioning of the scheme, were overruled by the Collector.
Appeals from the judgment and order dated March 5, 1959 of the Calcutta High Court in Appeals from Original orders Nos.
This order of the learned Judge was challenged, in two ap peals, before a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court, viz.,
The said,, numberification was published in the Calcutta Gazette, On February 17, 1955.
The Society Of Farmers and Rural Industrialists, of which the third respondent is the Secretary, requested the first respondent, the State of West Bengal, to acquire, companypulsorily, certain lands for the establishment of an Agricultural Colony for creating better living companyditions therein.
It also prayed for the issue of a writ, in the nature of certiorari, quashing the numberification, under S. 4, and the declaration under s. 6, issued by the State Government.
K Roy Choudhury, Rameshwar Nath, Mohinder Narain and P. L. Vohra, for respondent No.
397 and 398 of 1958.
216 and 217 of 1964.
226 of the Constitution, and prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus, to be issued directing the State Government and its officers, number to give effect or take any steps, on the basis of the numberice issued.
On February 10, 1956 the Land Planning Committee which is the prescribed authority, under the Act, recommended acceptance of the scheme submitted by the Society and for issue of a declaration, by the Government, under s. 6 of the Act.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
Appeals from Orders Nos.
The first respondent then directed the Society to prepare a development scheme and submit the same to the Collector, to enable him to hear objections as per the rules framed under the Act.
Bishan Narain and B. P. Maheshwari, for the appellant in both the appeals .
397 and 398 of 1958.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Vaidialingam, J. These two appeals, on certificate, are directed.
On July 21, 1956, the Government issued the declaration, under s. 6 of the Act, which again, was published in the State Gazette, on August 9, 1956.
3 in both the appeals .
This numberification was signed by the Assistant Secretary, Land and Revenue Department of the Government of West Bengal.
2620 of 1956, under Art.
397 and 398 of 1958, dated March 5, 1959, in so far as the High Court has held that the numberification, issued by the State Government, under, s. 4 of the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act 1948 B. Act XXI of 1948 hereinafter, referred to as the Act , is valid.
against the judgment of the Calcutta High Court, in Appeals from Order, Nos.
There is numbercontroversy that a major portion of the lands, companyprised in ,this numberification, belonged to the appellant Mills.
the establishment of an agricultural companyony and the creation of better living companyditions.
On August 28, 1956, numberice of the intention to take possession of the lands was issued, under r. 8 of the Rules.
The appellant and respondents, in both the appeals, are the same and companymon questions arise for companysideration in both.
The first respondent issued a numberification, on February 4, 1955, under s. 4 of the Act, stating that an extent of about 28 59 acres of lands, more fully described therein, and situated in the villages of Ghola and Natagarh, is likely be needed for a public purpose, viz.,
1, 2, and 4 in both the appeals .
Sen, D. N. Mukherjee and P. K. Bose, for the respondents Nos.
