CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION v. Union of India & Ors.

3. The writ petition has been keenly contested by the respondent no.2 & 3-Eastern Coalfields Limited, denying, inter alia, the averments made in the writ petition and contending as follows: (i) Respondent no.3- Eastern Coalfields Limited is the present owner of the plots in question. The R.S record-of-rights and L.R record- of-rights correctly record the name of M/s Apcar Collieries Limited under Khatian no.45 of Mouza-Charanpur under Block Baraboni, District-Paschim Bardhaman since it belonged to M/s Apcar Collieries Limited prior to nationalisation of collieries. Thereafter, it automatically vested to Eastern Coalfields Limited in terms of Coal Mines Nationalisation Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1973’) and presently the land- in-question is under the ownership and control of the Eastern Coalfields Limited authorities. (i) As per report of Sub-Divisional Land and Land Reforms Officer, Asansol made in the year 1991, in respect of Charanpur Colliery, Baraboni, the underground coal bearing land of Charanpur Colliery located in Mouza-Charanpur was under the ownership of Maharaja of Burdwan. The Burdwan Raj created a Pattani settlement in favour of one Sambhunath Singh in 1218 BS from whom one Kashinath Mondal took sepattani rights. M/s Apcar Collieries Limited thereafter obtained sepattani rights in 1223 BS and started mining operations in the property and raised coal. (ii) Burdwan Raj raised objection to the raising of coal by M/s Apcar Colliery Limited and thereafter upon compromise a mining lease was granted in favour of M/s Apcar Colliery Limited, which started mining 5 operations in the land-in-question under the name and style of ‘Charanpur Colliery’. M/s Apcar Colliery Limited went on liquidation and all rights, obligations to the property including coal mining rights were transferred in favour of M/s Equitable Coal Company which did mining operations until nationalisation of collieries as per Coal Mines Nationalisation Act, 1973. (iii) The plots-in-question, upon nationalisation of collieries, vested with Eastern Coalfields Limited which also performed mining operations over the said leasehold premises and at present is a closed mine and the said property is held by Eastern Coalfields Limited. The ‘Charanpur Colliery’ is recorded at serial no. 456 of the schedule appended to Coal Mines Nationalisation Act, 1973. (iv) The writ petitioner has suppressed materials particulars pertaining to order dated 16th May 2018 passed by Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Baraboni, Paschim Bardhaman in Misc Case no. 01 (Law) of 2019. The writ petitioner previously filed a writ petition before this Hon’ble Court on 6th August (year not legible) and a direction was passed for considering the representation of the petitioner for rectification of records-of- rights. Pursuant thereto no such application was filed by the writ petitioner for correction of record-of-rights. (v) The writ petitioner without applying for correction of record-of- rights pursuant to the aforesaid order, filed another writ petitioner being W.P no. 22853 (W) of 1998, wherein on 4th January, 1999 a direction was issued to the writ petitioner to file a representation 6 before the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Baraboni, who was directed to dispose of the said representation. (vi) The petitioner on the self-same matter filed another application before the WBLRTT being OA No. 2163 of 2003 for correction of record-of- rights and upon hearing the matter was disposed of on 22nd November 2004 directing the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Baraboni to treat the said application as representation before him and dispose of the same in accordance with law by a reasoned order after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the writ petitioner. It further made clear that if the land has vested in the State under the provisions of West Bengal Estate Acquisition Act, 1955 (In short ‘WBEA Act’) the application shall be disposed of taking into consideration the provisions of the said Act. Upon due consideration the prayer of the petitioner was rejected by the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Baraboni on 18th December 2009. (vii) Instead of approaching the ADM (LR) against such order, the writ petitioner filed another application before WBLRTT being OA no. 3501 of 2018 on the selfsame cause of action which was previously decided by the authority concerned. However, the writ petitioner prayed for withdrawal of the said application due to some inherent defects and on his prayer, liberty was given to file fresh representation. Representation was filed on 12th March 2019 which was disposed of with the similar findings. (viii) Again, another writ petition being W.P no. 19665 (W) of 2019 was filed by the petitioner praying for correction of record-of-rights and to 7 stop the process of vesting of land. The said writ petition was dismissed for default on 5th February 2024. It is evident that the said writ petition was filed with malafide intention based on surmises and conjectures. (ix) The writ petitioners wilfully and deliberately by suppressing material facts filed civil suits one after the other seeking order of injunction. (x) In light of the above, the respondent nos. 2 & 3-Eastern Coalfields Limited prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.

4. The State respondent nos. 7 & 9 filed its report in the form of affidavit in terms of order of this court dated 29th January 2024.

5. Mr. Tarun Das Sarma, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner namely Mahadeb Mandal was the absolute owner and possessor of the land-in-question. The brother of the petitioner filed a civil suit being Title Suit no. 294 of 1964 seeking permanent injunction and declaration against the leaseholder that the lease period is over. The said suit was decreed on compromise and the possession of the schedule land was handed over to the petitioner and others. Since then, the petitioner and other co-sharers are in vacant peaceful possession of the land-in-question by residing and also carrying on agricultural activities. However, out of inadvertence the name of the leaseholder has been recorded in the record-of-rights. In order to effect correction in the record-of-rights the petitioner filed an application being 3501 of 2018 before the WBLRTT wherein a direction was issued to the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer to dispose of the representation of 8 the petitioner with regard to correction of record-of-rights and however such prayer was rejected by the authority concerned. The petitioner preferred a writ petition being no. WPA no. 19665 of 2019, which has been dismissed for default. In the meantime, the respondents are trying to grab the entire land by way of acquisition without prior notice to the petitioner. Some men, claiming themselves to be the workers of the respondent no.2, Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Eastern Coalfields Limited, came to plot no.311 and adjacent plots for holding survey and starting construction work and from them the petitioner came to learn of such acquisition of the land-in-question by respondent-Eastern Coalfields Limited. Though notice has been issued on 30th July 2022 for acquisition of certain land including the land of the petitioner by the respondent authorities, yet till date it has not been served upon the petitioners. The entire process of acquisition under taken by respondent authorities is dehors the scope and provision of law. The petitioner and other co-sharers having right, title and interest over the land-in-question cannot be evicted therefrom. Challenging such action of the respondent authorities the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition. He seeks for appropriate direction upon the respondent authorities to take necessary steps to stop the process of acquisition of the land-in-question without due process of law.

6. On the contrary, Mr. Shiv Shankar Banerjee, learned advocate appearing for respondent nos. 2 & 3-Eastern Coalfields Limited submitted that admittedly the land-in-question was leased out to the leaseholder and mining operations were carried on since long and therefore the nature of 9 land is a coalmine. The Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 was enacted to provide for acquisition and transfer of the right, title and interest of the owners in respect of the coalmines in order to re-organise and reconstruct such coalmines to ensure proper utilisation. As per the definition under the said Act of 1973, ‘mine’ means any excavation where any operation for the purpose of searching for or obtaining minerals has been or is being carried on. In terms of Section 3 of the said Act of 1973, which provides for acquisition of rights of owners in respect of coalmines, on the date of coming into force of the said Act, the right, title and interest of the owners in respect of the coalmines specified in the schedule shall stand transferred to and shall vest absolutely in, the Central Government free from all encumbrances. The Charanpur Colliery owned by M/s Apcar Colliery which used to run mining operations in the land-in-question, till its liquidation, has been mentioned in the schedule of the said Act. Section 8 of the said Act of 1973 provides that the owner of every coalmine or group of coalmines shall be given by the Central Government, in cash and in the manner specified in Chapter VI, for the vesting in it, under section 3, the right, title and interest of the owner in relation to the aforesaid coalmine, an amount equal to the amount specified against it in the corresponding entry of the schedule. Thus, with the coming into force of the Act of 1973, the land-in-question which is a coalmine has vested with the Central Government and upon such vesting, the Act of 1973 provides for the amount of payment to be made to the owners of the coalmine. Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim any right over the land-in-question upon such statutory vesting of the coalmine. 10 The brother of the petitioner namely Thakur Das Mondal, filed a suit being Title Suit no. 294 of 1964 for correction of record-of-rights standing in the name of M/s Apcar Colliery Limited and the said suit was decreed on compromise. However, such compromise was effected without impleading the State of West Bengal as a party-defendant, which as per the petitioner made incorrect recordings in the record-of-rights as alleged. Therefore, the decree on compromise is not binding upon the State of West Bengal. In order to effect correction in the record-of-rights the petitioner filed misconceived applications one after the other. At first a writ petition was filed before this Hon’ble Court on 6th August (year not legible) and a direction was passed for considering the representation of the petitioner for rectification of records-of-rights. Without applying for correction of record- of-rights pursuant to the aforesaid order, the petitioner filed another writ petitioner being W.P no. 22853 (W) of 1998, wherein on 4th January, 1999 a direction was issued to the writ petitioner to file a representation before the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Baraboni, who was directed to dispose of the said representation. Again, another application with the similar prayer for correction of record-of-rights was filed before the WBLRTT being OA No. 2163 of 2003 which was disposed of on 22nd November 2004 directing the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Baraboni to treat the said application as representation before him and dispose of the same in accordance with law by a reasoned order after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the writ petitioner. Upon hearing the concerned authority rejected the prayer of the petitioner. Subsequent thereto instead of challenging the said order before the ADM 11 (LR), the writ petitioner filed another application being OA no. 3501 of 2018 before the WBLRTT on the self-same cause of action which was previously decided by the authority. The said application was withdrawn on the ground of certain inherent defects and on his prayer, liberty was given to file fresh representation. The authority for the second time decided the application against the petitioner. Another writ petition being no. 19665 (W) of 2019 was filed by the petitioner praying for correction of record-of-rights and to stop the process of vesting of land. The said writ petition was dismissed for default on 5th February 2024. Thus, it would appear that the petitioner with ulterior motive tried to overreach the judicial process by filing cases one after the other to have a favourable order. Further the present writ petition was filed on the same cause of action without seeking permission to withdraw the earlier writ petition and liberty to file afresh as required under Order 23 of the Civil Procedure Code. Moreover, the petitioner has also filed several civil suits in respect of the land-in-question seeking injunction over the said property. The petitioner has pursued the present writ petition without disclosing the material facts and in order to have an order in his favour, suppressed certain facts which are relevant to the present writ petition. Such act of the petitioner amounts to fraud on court. Fraud vitiates the solemn proceedings and no right can be claimed by a fraudster on the ground of technicalities. All surprise, trick, cunning, dissembling and other unfair way that is used to cheat anyone is fraud. Fraud and justice never dwell together and it cannot be 12 perpetuated or saved by the application of any equitable relief. To buttress his contentions relied on the following decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court. (i) S.P Chengalvaraya Naidu (Dead) by LRS versus Jagganath (Dead) by LRS and Others1 (ii) Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam versus Raj Kumar Rajinder Singh (Dead) Through Legal Representatives and Others2 In light of his aforesaid submissions, he sought for dismissal of the writ petition.

7. Mr. Soumitra Bandyopadhyay, learned advocate representing the State-respondents submitted that a field enquiry was conducted on 7th March 2024 in presence of the writ petitioner over L.R plot no. 53 to 55, 302 and others and during enquiry it revealed that the plot nos. 196, 237, 239, 240 and 303 of Mouza-Charanpur, J.L no. 52 are in direct control of the Eastern Coalfields Limited and mining activities were going on. The other plots being plot nos.53 to 56 and others are lying vacant and abandoned. It further revealed during enquiry that the Burdwan Raj Estate leased out a total area of 1964 bighas of mining land to M/s Apcar Colliery with effect from 1st April 1919 and subsequently M/s Apcar Colliery transferred its rights including coal mining rights to M/s Equitable Coal Co Ltd. with effect from 1st November 1955. The colliery was nationalised as per Coal Miles (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 and mining activities continued till 16th April 1987. The L.R record-of-rights stands in the name of M/s Apcar Colliery in respect of Khatian no.45. The land-in-question has vested