280/1976 against Appellant No.2 Vide order dated 02.08.1983 and 17.8.1983, Proceedings No.244/1976 and No.
Proceedings No.252/1976, pertaining to Mahabir Prasad Maskara, was disposed of vide order dated 24.8.1983, declaring 38.8591 acres of agricultural lands to vest in the State.
Aggrieved by the same, Appellants and other companysharers preferred a Writ Petition before the High Court of Calcutta, assailing the initiation of proceedings under 14 T 3 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act 1955, under Chapter IIB of the said Act on the ground that the said Chapter of the Land Reforms Act is number applicable to the territories which came from Bihar on transfer and where the Appellants holds land.
Challenging the order of vesting passed under Chapter IIB of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, the applicant filed a writ petition being C.r.
Similar order was passed in another writ petition in the Calcutta High Court in CR No.2001 W of 1985.
On 24.09.1958 the West Bengal Transferred Territory Assimilation of Laws Act, 1958 was brought into force.
By virtue of Section 13 of the Act, Chapter II B for ceiling on holding was sought to be inserted for the first time in the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, and the State Government issued Notification number1516 L ref.11 February, 1971, which reads as under In exercise of the power companyferred by sub section 2 of Section 1 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Amendment Act, 1971 President Act number3 of 1971 the Governor is pleased hereby to appoint the 12th day of the February as the date on which all the provisions of the said Act except those in clause 1 of section 7 and section 13, 15 and 17 thereof shall companye into force in the whole of the State of West Bengal.
Sd K.L. Mukhopadhayaya M Sd K.J. Majumdar, M The appellants challenged the aforesaid order of the Tribunal by filing a writ petition before the Calcutta High Court.
The said Civil Rule was disposed of by an order dated 8.1.1992 by the High Court to the effect that in absence of the numberification under the Land Reforms Act extending the said chapter IIB to the transferred territories the impugned order of vesting under section 14T 3 is number sustainable and quashed.
At the very outset, we numberice that Gangadhar Singhs case was number decided by a Division Bench of Calcutta High Court as observed by the Tribunal.
The provisions of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act were extended to the transferred Territories by issuing a Notification under Sec 3 3 of the West Bengal Transferred Territories Assimilation of Laws Act, 1958.
Relying upon the judgment in Gangadhar Singhs case supra , the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the application of the appellants herein, who moved O.A. No.
280/1976 were disposed of with a finding that appellant number.1 and 2 herein were minors and hence, the lands held by them were taken into account as lands of their father Mahabir Prasad Maskara.
After the aforesaid order was passed by the High Court, the appellants moved an application along with the companyy of the order before the Tribunal for a direction to companyrect the revenue record by entering their names.
The Tribunal dismissed the application on the ground that the decision of the High Court in Gangadhar Singhs case supra is binding precedents and the earlier judgment of the High Court is numberlonger a good law.
On 30.3.1956, the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 came into force and the lands of the appellants were transferred from State of Bihar to State of West Bengal by virtue of the enactment of Bihar and West Bengal Transferred Territories Act, 1956, which came into force w.e.f.
Thereafter, in the year 1971, West Bengal Land Reforms Amendment Act was enacted.
The applicants grievance is that despite such order, numberaction has been taken by the authority to companyrect the record of rights.
No.3466 W of 1984 on the ground that the said chapter of the Land Reforms Act is number applicable to the territories which came from Bihar on transfer and where the applicant holds lands.
The State Government issued further Notification number1650 I, Ref/2A 58/70 dated 13.2.1971 as under In exercise of the power companyferred by sub s. 2 of s.1 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Amendment Act, 1971 Presidents Act number3 of 1971 , the Governor is pleased hereby to appoint the 15th day of the February, 1971, as the date on which the provisions of clause i of s.7, and Ss.13, 15 and 17 of the said Act shall companye into force in the whole of the State of West Bengal.
Hence, the present appeals by special leave.
In the year 1976, following three vesting proceedings under Section 14 T of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 were initiated No.252/1976 against Mahabir Prasad Maskara, father of the appellants No.244/19766 against Appellant No.1 No.
The High Court relying on the decision in Gangadhar Singhs case dismissed the writ petition.
In the year 1984, the appellants challenged the numberice of vesting of their land by filing a writ petition which was allowed and the numberice of vesting was quashed.
Representative at length.
On the basis of said order passed by the High Court, the appellants moved the Tribunal for companyrection of the revenue record.
Some of the provisions of the West Bengal Reforms Act were enforced in the transferred Territory.
North Dinajpur for companypliance and information.
Y. EQBAL, J. Leave granted.
These appeals by special leave are directed against the companymon judgment and order dated 20.3.2009, passed by the Division Bench of High Court of Calcutta in W.P.L.R.T. Nos.
728 of 2002, 429 of 2002 and 430 of 2002, whereby the High Court dismissed the aforementioned Writ Applications holding that the question as to whether Chapter IIB of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act would be applicable qua the appellants in view of the fact that they belonged to a place which was in erstwhile State of Bihar and by virtue of the State Reorganisation Act, their lands were included in the State of West Bengal was decided against the appellants relying on the judgment in case of Ganga Dhar Singh Ors.
For better appreciation, the order dated 20.2.2002 is reproduced hereinbelow 20.2.2002 Heard the learned companynsel for the applicant and the learned Govt.
19.10.1956.
Even the judgment passed in the appellants writ petition filed in 1984 was neither companysidered number distinguished.