LexPRADEEP KUMAR MASKARA AND OTHERS versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2014] 13 S.C.R. 540 A PRADEEP KUMAR MASKARAAND OTHERS B v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS (Civil Appeal Nos. 984446 of 2014) OCTOBER 17, 2014 [M. Y. EQBAL AND PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, JJ.] Practice & Procedure - Duty to follow direction/ C judgment of superior Court - Land in question transferred from the State of Bihar to the State of West Bengal pursuant to the enactment of 1956 Act and the provisions of West Bengal Land Reforms Act were extended to the transferred territories - Consequently, land in question shown to have o been vested in the S,tate of West Bengal - Appellant challenged the order of vesting by filing a writ petition - Writ petition allowed by the High Court - Order not challenged and attained finality - On basis of said order of High Court, the appellants moved application before the Land Tribunal E for correction of revenue record - Tribunal dismissed the application on the ground that the decision of High Court in Gangadhar Singh's case was binding precedent and the earlier judgment of the High Court was no longer a good law - Appellants challenged the order of Tribunal by filing writ F petition - High Court relying on the decision in Gangadhar Singh's case dismissed the writ petition - Propriety of- Held: Not proper- The tribunal had no jurisdiction to differ with the decision given by High Court in the writ petition filed by the appellants - When judgment rendered by High Court in the G case of appellants and the said decision having not been quashed or set aside by a larger bench of the High Court or by the Supreme Court, the tribunal ought not to have refused to follow the order of High Court - Tribunal directed to follow the decision of High Court decided in the case of appellants H 540 PRADEEP KUMAR MASKARA v. STATE OF WEST 541 BENGAL - West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955- s. 14-T(3), Chapter A 11-8 - Bihar and West Bengal (Transferred Territories) Act, 1956. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD:1. The tribunal has no jurisdiction to differ B with the decision given by the Calcutta High Court In the writ petition filed by the appellants. The tribunal further committed grave error in following the decision in Gangadhar Singh's case treating it to be a Division Bench judgment of Calcutta High Court when as a C matter of fact the decision in Gangadhar Singh's case was decided by a Single Judge of the High Court. Even the judgment passed in the appellant's writ petition filed In 1984 was neither considered nor distinguished. In the back ground of these facts, when the judgment rendered D by the High Court in the case of the appellants and the said decision having not been quashed or set aside by a larger bench of the High Court or by this Court, the tribunal ought not to have refused to follow the order of the High Court. [Paras 25, 26][552·E·H; 553-A] E 2. It is well settled that even if the decision on a ·question of law has been reversed or modified by subsequent decision of a superior court in any other case it shall not be a ground for review of such judgment F merely because a subsequent judgment of the single judge has taken contrary view. That does not confer jurisdiction upon the tribunal to Ignore the judgment and direction of the High Court given In the case of the appellants, The tribunal is directed to follow the decision G of High Court decided in the case of the appellants. [Paras 27, 29)(553·8-C; E] Ganga Dhar Singh & Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors. 1997 (II) CHN 140; Ganga Dhar Singh H 542 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 13 S.C.R. A and ors. v. State of West Bengal & ors. (1997) 2 CHN 140; Nand Kishore Ahirwar &Anr. v. Haridas Parsedia & Ors. (2001) 9 SCC 325; Shanti Devi v. State of Haryana & Ors. (1999) 5 SCC 703; State of Assam v. Ripa Sharma (2013) 3 SCC 63: 2013 B (4) SCR 151 - referred to. Case Law Reference: 1997 (II) CHN 140 referred to Para 11 c (1997) 2 CHN 140 referred to Para 11 (2001) 9 sec 325 referred to Para 15 (1999) 5 sec 103 referred to Para 15 D 2013 (4) SCR 151 referred to Para 16 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 9844-46 of 2014. From the judgment and order dated 20.03.2009 in E WPLRT No. 728/2002, 429/2002 and 430/2002 passed by the High Court of Calcutta. F G Raju Ramachandran, Sr. Adv., Devashish Bharuka, Vaibhav N., Ranjan Mukherjee,Advs. for the Appellants. Kalyan Kr. Bandopadhyay Sr.Adv., Soumya Chakraborty, Saakaar Sardana
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.