Court mandates immediate vacating of premises and appoints arbitrator for compensation assessment, emphasizing State’s violation of property rights.
In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court has ordered the Transportation, Planning and Traffic Engineering Directorate under the Government of West Bengal to vacate premises unlawfully occupied, following an appeal against a prior judgment. The court upheld the locus standi of the Directorate to appeal but found the appeal unmeritorious, emphasizing the State's failure to comply with previous court orders to vacate the premises.
The case, rooted in a requisition order from 1996, saw the Directorate occupying property beyond the expiration of its lease, a move originally upheld by an order dated December 24, 2001, which was never contested successfully. The High Court reiterated that the requisition was nullified, and the Directorate's continued occupation was unlawful, lacking any legal tenancy status post the lease expiry.
The court dismissed the appeal, noting the Directorate's autonomous capacity to litigate separately from the State. Furthermore, it affirmed the writ petitioner's ownership based on a prior sanctioned Scheme of Arrangement and the validity of appointing an arbitrator to assess compensation for the unlawful occupation.
Highlighting the State's failure to adhere to due process, the court directed the appointment of an arbitrator by the Principal Secretary to ensure impartial compensation assessment. The judgment also criticized the Directorate's persistent resistance to lawful eviction, imposing personal costs on the Director of the Directorate to be paid to the respondent.
This ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to uphold property rights against unlawful state actions and ensures fair compensation mechanisms are in place.
Bottom Line:
Locus standi of the appellant, a Directorate under the State of West Bengal, to prefer an appeal independently, is upheld. The appellant is directly and substantially affected by the impugned judgment which directed it to vacate the premises and established that the appellant was an unlawful occupant.
Statutory provision(s):
Constitution of India, Article 226; Limitation Act, 1963, Section 27, Article 65; Transfer of Property Act, 1982, Section 108(q), Section 116.
