Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
D.P. Mohapatra and R.P. Sethi

JUDGMENT

D.P. Mohapatra, J.

1. State of West Bengal represented by the Secretary Land and Land Reforms Department, the Junior Land Reforms Officer, Barrackpore Circle, P.S. Khardah, Distt. 24 Parganas and the Additional Collector and Additional District Magistrate (Land Reforms), 24 Parganas (North) have filed this appeal assailing the judgment of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court dated 7.4.1977 allowing the Appeal from Original Order No. 409 of 1961 filed by Sasthidas Malik, (respondent No. 2 herein) on setting aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge in Civil Rule No. 915/59. The Civil Rule was filed by Sasthidas Malik who will hereinafter be referred to as the petitioner.

2. The dispute raised in the case relates to the question whether the writ petitioner is entitled to retain the lands comprised in plot Nos. 11 and 32 under Khatyan Nos. 21 and 390 respectively of Mouza Kalidash extending over an area of 2.3432 acres, under the provisions of the West Bengal Estates' Acquisition Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In the records of right published in the year 1931 the lands were recorded in the name of the petitioner's father and as having pucca structures therein. By two indentures of lease dated 26.11.1947 and 25.8.1952. Prosad Das Malik, father of the petitioner, gave lease of the said two plots of land to M/s. Scene Screen (Pvt.) Ltd., respondents No. 1 herein, (hereinafter referred to as the lessee), for the purpose of building a cinema house and shop rooms, for a term of 30 years on payment of rent mentioned in the documents. After the death of his father the petitioner had become the owner of the said lands. After coming into force of the West Bengal Estates' Acquisition Act, 1953 the petitioner submitted a return in Form 'B' proposing to retain the lands covered by the said leases as an intermediary under Section 6 of the Act. In the record of rights prepared under Section 39 of the Act the lands were recorded in the name of respondent No. 1 as a non-agricultural tenant under the petitioner. When the petitioner demanded arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 4725/- form the lessee it replied that as a result of operation of the provisions of the Act the petitioner was no longer entitled to receive the rent which was being paid to the Government of West Bengal. Faced with the situation the petitioner filed the writ petition contending inter-alia that the State Government has no right to collect rent from the - lessee as under Section 6(1)(b) of the Act the petitioner is entitled to retain the lands and he has elected to do so by submitting the return in Form 'B' including these lands. Having failed to get favourable response from the officers concerned of the State the petitioner filed the writ petition seeking inter alia a writ of mandamus directing the State Government and its officers not to recognise the lessee as a tenant under the State and not to realise rent from it.

3. In the ........