2014 (6) TMI 1078 - HC - Indian Laws

Actual possession of property - no mutation certificate has yet been issued by the Urban Development Department - HELD THAT - Since it is evident from the memo dated 6th June, 2013 that the application dated 16th August, 2010 filed by the petitioner is still pending, considering such fact, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the District Magistrate, Nadia, the respondent no.2 to dispose of the said application by passing a reasoned order to be communicated to the parties, within a fortnight from the date of presentation of a copy of the order down-loaded from the official server, after giving an opportunity of hearing to a representative of the petitioner and to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Kalyani, Nadia and the Estate Manager, Kalyani, Nadia, the added respondents.

Summary

Issues:
1. Application for grant of license under West Bengal Solvent, Raffinate, Slop and other Equivalent Petroleum Products Order 2000.
2. Requirement of mutation certificate for establishing actual possession.
3. Disposal of pending application by District Magistrate.

Analysis:

1. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking direction from State authorities to process their application dated 16th August, 2010 for a license under the West Bengal Solvent, Raffinate, Slop, and other Equivalent Petroleum Products Order 2000. The respondent no.2 had refused the license citing the absence of a mutation certificate issued by the Urban Development Department, as per a memo dated 6th June, 2013 by the District Magistrate. The petitioner argued that the State cannot insist on a mutation certificate as per the notification dated 12th September, 2000. The State's advocate contended that a mutation certificate is necessary to establish actual possession of the land in question.

2. The Court, after hearing both parties, noted that the application filed by the petitioner on 16th August, 2010 was still pending as per the memo dated 6th June, 2013. Consequently, the Court directed the District Magistrate, Nadia, as the respondent no.2, to dispose of the application within a fortnight from the date of presentation of the Court's order. The District Magistrate was instructed to provide a reasoned order communicated to all relevant parties, including the petitioner, Sub-Divisional Officer, Kalyani, Nadia, and the Estate Manager, Kalyani, Nadia. The District Magistrate was also granted the authority to consider rules, circulars, notifications, and other relevant documents during the decision-making process. Importantly, the Court clarified that it did not delve into the merits of the case, leaving all points open for the respondent no.2 to address.

3. Finally, the Court made no ruling on costs and directed the provision of an urgent photostat certified copy of the order upon application on a priority basis. The judgment aimed to ensure a timely and fair resolution of the pending application for the grant of a license under the specified Order, emphasizing the importance of due process and proper consideration of all relevant factors by the District Magistrate.