D/L60 18.09.2026 Bpg. WPA No.21482 of 2024 Syed Ali Mallik & Ors. Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Manik Das Mr. Falguni Majhi Mr. Arindam Chatterjee. …for the petitioners. Mr. Shib Shankar Banerjee Mr. Rhitam Chatterjee. …for the State. Ms. Amrita Pandey Ms. Ayushi Mishra. …for the U.O.I. 1. “Affidavit-of-service” filed by the petitioners be kept with the record. 2. The instant writ application has been filed on the allegation that the land of the predecessor-in- interest was acquired/utilized, but no compensation was paid either to the predecessor- in-interest or to the writ petitioners. 3. One Felu Mallik was the original owner in respect of the plot mentioned in paragraph 3 of the writ application and the name of the petitioner was recorded in the concerned records of rights. 2 Subsequently, the petitioners came to know that the said plots were acquired but no compensation was paid. Accordingly, an application under “Right to Information Act” was filed. Pursuant to such application, by a letter dated 22.05.2023 the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Purba Bardhaman being State Public Information Officer informed the petitioner no.1 that R.S. Plot Nos.17 and 18 in Mouza-Gopalnagar, J.L. No.78 were acquired in L.A. Case No.20R/63-64 and whereas R.S. Plot Nos.21 and 26 were not acquired in the abovenoted L.A.Case. 4. Upon receipt of the said information, the heir of Felu Mallick made a representation praying for disbursement of the compensation with interest, to the heirs in accordance with law. As the said application was not considered, a writ application was filed being WPA28731 of 2023, wherein this Hon’ble Court directed the respondent no.2 being the National Highways Authority to consider and dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioners dated 16th October, 2023. Pursuant to such direction, the Project Director, National Highways Authority by a letter dated 3rd May, 2024, informed the petitioner no. 1 that all the relevant documents with respect to land acquisition 3 in connection with L.A. Case No.20R/63-64 were provided to the petitioners herein. 5. Subsequently, the petitioners filed the present writ application claiming the following reliefs: (a) “A writ and/or order and/or direction in the nature of Mandamus do issue commanding the respondent authorities to immediately withdraw or cancel or rescind the decision/order dated 03.05.2024 passed by the respondent No.5, being the Project Director, National Highways Authority[NH-2] or in the alternative to set aside and/or quash the said decision/order dated 03.05.2024; (b) A writ and/or order and/or direction in the nature of Mandamus do issue commanding the respondent authorities to pay compensation to the petitioners at the present market rate with interest or to release/return the said plots being Plot Nos.17, 18, 21 and 26, Mouza Gopalnagar, J.L. No.78, Police Station-Burdwan, District-Purba Bardhaman, with damages in favour of the petitioners.” 6. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the compensation as disclosed by the 4 respondent-authorities was not paid either to their predecessors or to them. Therefore, in absence of any payment of compensation, the alleged acquisition has no legal force in the eye of law. 7. That the petitioner further submits that the plot nos. 21 & 26 were utilized without due process of law, and therefore, the said plots are liable to be released, or the same ought to have been acquired in accordance with law. 8. That, for redressal of the aforesaid grievances a representation was also made vide letter dated 16.10.23. However till date same has not been considered. Hence, the instant writ application has been filed. 9. Learned advocate for the respondent-authorities draws the attention of this Court in respect of the letter dated 22.05.2023 to substantiate that R.S. Plot Nos.17 and 18 in Mouza-Gopalnagar, J.L. No.78 were acquired pursuant to L.A. Case No.20R/63-64 and R.S. Plot Nos.21 and 26 were not acquired in the above noted L.A.Case. He also draws the attention of this Court in respect of the document being the award register for the payment of compensation, and submits that the heirs of the original owner received the compensation amount. 5 Therefore, the allegation of non-payment of compensation is not correct in the eye of law. 10. Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate appearing for the State, further submits that it is not clear from the record. whether the National Highways Authority took and/or utilsed any land without the sanction of law. 11. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the materials on record. 12. From the writ application, it appears that the prayer made by the petitioners is for return of the said plots being Nos.17, 18, 21 and 26 for utilizing the same without any acquisition, but it appears from the records itself that plot nos.17 and 18 are the subject matter of acquisition and the said acquisition proceeding completed by payment of compensation to the awardees. The other allegation relates to plot nos. 21 and 26 is that though those plots have been utilized by the respondents, but no acquisition took place in accordance with law. 13. Be that as it may, the allegation is that the land has been utilized by the statutory authority of a citizen in violation of law. That amounts to violation of Article 300A of the Constitution of India, which postulates that no person can be deprived of their 6 land and from enjoyment of their property without due process of law. 14. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the respondent-authority no.2 being the competent authority herein, shall consider the representation made on 16.10.2023. After conducting a field enquiry upon notice to all the parties, including the National Highways Authority and by passing a reasoned order dealing with the issues mentioned hereinabove. If the competent authority is of the opinion that the land of the petitioners were wrongly utilized or encroached upon, then remedial action also to be taken to that effect. Let this exercise be completed by 31st December, 2026. 15. With the aforesaid observations, WPA 21482 of 2024 is disposed of. 16. Since no affidavits have been called for by this Court, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents, and the adjudicating authority will exercise its power without being influenced by any observations made by this Court. 17. There will be no order as to costs. 7 18. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Partha Pratim Roy, J.)