IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/42/2026 Mr. Thirupati Vs The Lt. Governor & Ors. Mrs. Anjili Nag, Sr. Advocate Mr. Adarsh Ilango … for the petitioner Mr. Rakesh Kumar … for the Respondent Nos.1,2 &3 Ms. Babita Das … for the Respondent Nos. 4 & 5 March 10, 2026 [AKB] Item No.41 1. The genesis of the dispute arises in this case as a reply was given on July 06, 2017 to the application made on 12.6.2012 for diversion of land for one purpose to another in accordance with the Master Plan for planning area, with the observations that the area is covered under the Indian Forest Act and hence felling of trees in the forest land are concerned and no construction activities are permitted. 2. The learned advocate representing the petitioner specifically argued that the petitioner is the recorded tenant of the land bearing Survey No.259/31/A/24 measuring about an area of 0.0200 hectares, situated at Pahargaon village, Sri Vijaya Puram Tehsil, South Andaman as he purchased the same through a registered sale deed. 3. The petitioner purchased the land for the purpose of constructing a house and accordingly submitted an application on June 12, 2012 seeking diversion of land for agricultural 2 purpose for constructing a house for dwelling purpose and accordingly submitted on June 16, 2017 all the required documents such as affidavit, record entry, sketch map, proposed map, photographs for the purpose of such diversion before the concerned authority. However, since his application was not entertained, he has to come before this Court. 4. It is further submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that the petitioner come to know that Andaman & Nicobar Administration issued a notification modifying the Master Plan in respect of a land which belong to one Bidhan Chandra Podder i.e. land bearing Survey No.259/31/A/26 situated at Prothrapur village, Sri Vijaya Puram Tehsil, South Andaman District which is almost adjacent to the plot of the present petitioner. Such notification was published in the news paper on March 21, 2025. 5. That apart the land of one Jai Shankar Mishra having Survey plot No. 259/31/A/1 has also been considered for diversion without even having any judicial order. Accordingly, a representation was made before the Sub Divisional Officer as per format on October 6, 2025, but as of now no reply has come from such authority. 6. The learned Advocate representing the respondent Nos. 4 & 5 would submit that the said representation is still pending for final disposal as they are waiting for the report to be given by the respondent No.3, Chief Engineer, APWD. 7. The learned advocate representing the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 on the other hand submits that so far the notification is 3 concerned that relates to a specific plot and hence fresh adjudication so far the present plot is concerned is necessary and accordingly undertakes to submit the appropriate report in this regard to the respondent No.5 in order to dispose of the representation/application submitted by the petitioner. 8. Having heard learned counsels and on going through the materials on record, it transpires that by virtue of notification published in the news paper it was clearly mentioned that the proposed land used Zoning of the plot under Survey No. 259/31/A/26 of the Prothrapur village shall be read as “Public and Semi-Public” in place of Reserved Forest in Map No. PBPA/VILLAGE/PROP/6. The Form ‘F’ i.e. the Record of Holding Register in respect of plot number of Jai Shankar Mishra situated at Survey no.259/31/A/1 also revealed that the said plot number was corrected in terms of Order dated 06.09.2018 passed by DC (SA). It is further evident from the sketch map, served to the petitioner by the authority that the said plot is also adjacent to the plot of the petitioner. 9. Therefore, there is every possibility that this plot being adjacent plots to those plots are also coming within that de- notified area however a specific opinion in this regard is necessary and a specific report to that extent is also required to be furnished in this regard before the Respondent no 5 for disposal of the application filed by the petitioner. 10. Accordingly, the respondent No.5 is directed to pass a reasoned order on the basis of the application so filed before him by the petitioner after taking appropriate steps and the 4 respondent No.3 is directed to make all endeavor to assist the respondent No.5 in order to arrive at a logical conclusion in respect of the application dated June 16, 2017 filed by the petitioner. 11. Such exercise is to be done within the period of six weeks from the date of uploading of this order. Parties are directed to communicate the downloaded copy of this order from the official website of this Court and to communicate the same to the respective authorities for taking appropriate action within the time as stipulated by this Court. 12. In view of the above this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 13. Parties to act on the server copy of the order. (Chaitali Chatterjee (Das), J.)