Form No. J (2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present: The Hon’ble Justice Debangsu Basak And The Hon’ble Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi F.M.A. 944 of 2025 IA NO: CAN/1/2025 Ehsanul Haque & Ors. vs. The State of West Bengal & ors. For the Appellants : Mr. Sufi Kamal, Advocate Ms. Shireen Hossain, Advocate For the State : Mr. Chandi Charan De, Ld. A.G.P. Ms. Reshma Chatterjee, Advocate For the Respondent/ Howrah Zilla Parishad : Ms. Mekhla Sinha, Advocate Heard on : 14.07.2025 Judgment on : 14.07.2025 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.:- 1. Appeal is at the behest of the writ petitioners and directed against the order dated April 17, 2025 passed in W.P.A.8766 of 2024. 2. By the impugned order, learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground that, the writ petitioners failed to substantiate at least prima FMA 944 of 2025 2 facie that portion of the land of the predecessor-in-interest of the appellants were acquired for the purpose of construction of a metal road. 3. During the pendency of the appeal, we by our order dated June 17, 2025 called upon the State to submit a report as to who the recorded owners of the two plots involved were and also whether, those two plots were used for the purpose of construction of roar or not. 4. Report as called for by the order dated June 17, 2025 filed in Court be taken on record. 5. Report of the Concerned Block Land and Land Reforms Officers dated June 23, 2025 states that, portions of plot nos.762 and 743 were utilized for the purpose of construction of a metal road. Such report acknowledges that, the predecessor-in-interest of the appellants before us are the recorded owners in respect of such plots of land. Report also states that, the plots of land concerned were not partitioned by metes and bounds amongst the owners thereof. 6. Since land stands utilized by the State, albeit for a public purpose, the finding of the learned Single Judge as to no evidence of acquisition for metal road, cannot be sustained. 7. Since, portion of plot nos.743 and 762 were utilized for the purpose of construction of a metal road, and since, no acquisition and requisition proceeding was initiated in respect thereof, it would be appropriate to direct the State to either invoke the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation FMA 944 of 2025 3 and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 to acquire the same or proceed to purchase the portion of the two plots, from the owners thereof on a direct purchase basis. 8. Learned advocate appearing for the appellants submits that, his clients are willing to sell the land in question to the State, on direct purchase basis. 9. In such circumstances, State is at liberty to purchase the portion of the land involved from the original owners thereof, on direct purchase basis. In doing so, the State will adhere to its declared policy for direct purchase. State shall invoke the provisions of the Act of 2013 of the direct purchase is not possible for any reason whatsoever. 10. In the event of direct purchase, land price will be the market value of the property as shown in the records of the Registrar of Assurances, not less than four weeks from the date of presentation of the deed of conveyance. 11. F.M.A. 944 of 2025 alongwith IA NO: CAN/1/2025 are disposed of without any order as to costs. (Debangsu Basak, J.) 12. I agree. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.) CHC