Sitala Prasad Jaiswal And Ors. vs The State Of West Bengal And Ors.

on
19 November, 2004

Para 28 Considering the aforesaid rival contentions of the respective parties I find that
the prayer of the petitioners regarding sanction of the building plan was refused by the
Municipality on the ground that the said land has been recorded as 'Karkhana' and not as
'Danga'. It appears from the records that the earlier writ petition filed on behalf of the writ
petitioners herein was finally decided upon hearing the submissions of the respective
parties including the respondent Municipality wherein Justice D.P. Kundu, J. specifically
observed as hereunder:

"I have also discussed hereinabove that from the documents produced by the learned
advocate for respondent No. 2 it is evident that the character of the land in question has
already been changed in the records and now it is recorded as 'Danga'. Under the
circumstances, the land in question can no longer be treated as 'Karkhana'. Therefore, the
building plan submitted by the petitioners requires immediate consideration by the South
Dum Dum Municipality and it is now not necessary to have the view or approval of any
department of Government of West Bengal."

Para 17 that authorities of the said Municipality have also admitted that the factory was
not only closed since 1968 but the land and the factory shed was being used for
residential purpose. Mr. Mitra submits that Section 4C was introduced in the Land
Reforms Act by the Amendment Act of 1981 with retrospective effect from 7th August,
1969 and therefore, the user of the land in question had changed into residence and had
become residential even prior to coming into operation of Section 4C. Therefore,
according to the learned counsel of the petitioners, permission of the Collector will be
necessary only if there is change of use of the said plot of land from residence into any
other use as the land was being used as residence prior to 1969.