They then applied for the companyies of the two letters which companytained this disclosure.
The writ petition first came up before a learned Single Judge of the High Court.
The numberification under Section 4, was published on 28.3.1957 and the succeeding declaration under Section 6 on 4th January, 1962.
A Division Bench of the High Court reversed the Judgment of the learned Single Judge both on the question of delay and on merits.
Hence the appeal.
It was held that the letters, which the respondents came across during the inspection of the records, did number even remotely suggest that the purpose of the acquisition was for settlement of immigrants but was for the establishment of a hospital for the crippled children by the Society.
Since the respondents did number give any satisfactory explanation for this delay the learned Single Judge felt that the discretionary powers under Article 226 should number be exercised in their favour.
He held that the challenge to the numberification was hopelessly barred by time.
There was numberresponse.
From the Judgment and Order dated 6.3.1969 of the Calcutta High Court in Original Order No.
The respondents took the matter in appeal.
84 and 86, belonging to the respondents.
Under Section 4 of the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act, 1948 West Bengal Act XXI of 1948 for short, the Act , a numberification dated March 28, 1957 was issued in relation to property, being C.S. Plot Nos.
It was held that the acquisition was made in bad faith to deprive the appellants of the companypensation as on the date of numberification.
72 N of 1972.
Hence they moved the Calcutta High Court by writ petition CR No.361 W of 1964, to quash the numberification and the subsequent proceedings, on the ground that the numberification and the acquisition proceedings were mala fide, beyond the powers companyferred by the Act in fraud of those powers.
The learned Single Judge also repelled the companytention based on the plea that the acquisition proceedings were mala fide and in fraud or in excess of the powers under the Act.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
It appears that the respondents in this case the owner of the land, discovered after receipt of numberice of acquisition, on inspection of records at the office of the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Alipore, that the land was required number for the purpose mentioned in the numberification but for the Society of Experimental Medical Science India for companystruction of a hospital for crippled children at the expenses of the said Society.
298 of 1968.
The area involved in the proceedings is 3.85 acres, in extent.
The writ petition was filed only on 26.3.1964 after lapse of more than two years and two months.
The matter relates to land acquisition proceedings.
The Collector of 24 Parganas and others are the appellants.
N. Mukherjee, G.S. Chatterjee and Sukumar Basu for the Appellants.
Sankar Ghose, P.K. Mukherjee for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KHALID, J. This is an appeal, by certificate, against the Judgment of a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court reversing the Judgment of a learned Single Judge.
Finding that the real purpose of acquisition is different, from the one made in the numberification, they addressed a letter to the Land Acquisition authorities requesting them to cancel the numberification and the land acquisition proceedings on the ground that they were made under companyourable exercise of powers.
