Authority: Calcutta High Court (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)
Order Date: 30.09.2026
Case Overview
- Parties: Appellant – Nowda Thana Ferry Service Co‑operative Society Limited; Respondents – The Secretary, Hariharpara Thana Ferry Service Co‑operative Society Ltd. & others, including the State of West Bengal and Hariharpara Panchayat Samiti.
- Nature of Proceeding: Appeal (MAT 1503 of 2026) against an interim order dated 31.07.2026 passed by a learned Single Judge in WPA 15822 of 2026 that stayed the e‑auction of 13 ferry ghats, specifically Bhandardaha (Humaipur) Ferry Ghat.
- Background: The e‑auction notice (No. 01/HPS/FG/2026‑27, second call) was issued on 25.06.2026 by the Executive Officer, Hariharpara Panchayat Samiti. The appellant participated, was declared highest bidder with a bid of Rs 4,90,000 for a 3‑year lease, received a letter of acceptance on 28.07.2026 and deposited Rs 1,63,334 as first‑year lease rent. The writ petitioner, an existing operator, also bid but was unsuccessful and filed a writ petition challenging the e‑auction process.
- Legal Contentions:
- Appellant argued that the Single Judge’s order improperly impleaded a respondent, created a vested right for the lease, and was contrary to the Division Bench judgment (M.A.T. No. 139 of 2025) which held that Rule 281 of the West Bengal Land and Land Reforms Manual, 1991 does not apply to ferry ghats managed by panchayat bodies.
- Respondent’s counsel contended that the Land Manual has statutory force under the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 and that the interim order should have been based on a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable loss.
- Both sides cited statutory provisions (Section 52 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955; Rule 28A of the West Bengal Land Reform Rules, 1965; Rule 266 and Rule 281(iii) of the Land Manual) and case law (Raj Kumar v. Shakti Raj; Shah Babulal Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kania).
Court’s Reasoning
- The Court observed that the writ petitioner had actually participated in the e‑auction and was an unsuccessful bidder; the interim order was obtained “behind the back” of the successful bidder and without proper representation of the Panchayat Samiti.
- The Court found that the Single Judge did not discuss the requisite prima facie case, balance of convenience, or the rights of the successful bidder before granting the stay.
- Regarding statutory hierarchy, the Court held that while the Land Manual may apply to state‑owned lands, the Panchayat Act, 1973 and the powers conferred on Panchayat Samitis under the Constitution (Article 243G) and the West Bengal Panchayat (Panchayat Samiti Administration) Rules, 2008 supersede the Manual for ferry ghats transferred to Panchayat control.
- The Court emphasized that e‑auction is the only mechanism prescribed by state policy for maximising revenue from ferry ghats and that the Manual’s Rule 281(iii) does not override the Panchayat’s authority to conduct transparent auctions.
- The Court also noted that Section 41(ha) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 restricts interim injunctions in matters of public interest such as ferry services.
Final Outcome
- The interim order dated 31.07.2026 staying the e‑auction is set aside.
- The e‑auction process for Bhandardaha (Humaipur) Ferry Ghat may proceed as per the original notice dated 25.06.2026.
- The appellant (Nowda Thana Ferry Service Co‑operative Society Ltd.) is added as a respondent in the original writ petition.
- All respondents, including the Panchayat Samiti, are directed to file their opposition within the time fixed by the writ court; the writ petition will be heard on the basis of pleadings and prayers.
- Photocopies of the judgment may be obtained upon formal request.
Topics: e‑Auction, Ferry Lease, Land Management