STATE OF HARYANA Vs. PRADUMAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal has been preferred by the State of Haryana against the judgment and order dated 13th July, 2000 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 14050 of 1998, whereby the writ petition filed by the predecessor-in-interest of the Respondents herein was disposed of by directing the Respondent-State-Appellant herein, to allot land to the extent of 20 standard acres under the rehabilitation scheme for displaced persons who claim to have been displaced after the partition of this country in the year 1947.

(2.) The predecessor-in-interest of the Respondents herein had filed a writ petition in the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh praying to issue a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned letter dated 21.6.1996 (Annexure P/4 to the writ petition) issued by the Respondent No. 2/Appellant herein, i.e.,Joint Secretary to Government of Haryana, Rehabilitation Department, Chandigarh which contained a decision/instruction of the State Government to the effect that the allotment of land for rehabilitation against such claim of land, should be stopped forthwith. The writ Petitioner had further sought a writ of mandamus for a direction to the Respondent No. 3/Appellant herein, i.e., Tehsildar (Sales)-cum-Managing Officer, Karnal to make allotment of land in lieu of the land left by the Respondent-writ Petitioner in Pakistan in exercise of his powers under Section 20(1) of the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (for short the Act) and the rules made thereunder and to confer propriety rights upon the Petitioner/Respondents herein in respect of the land.

(3.) The learned Judges of the Division Bench, after hearing the parties concerned, were pleased to practically allow the writ petition with costs of rupees five thousand, although the operative portion indicates that it was only disposed of, as the High Court directed the State authorities to allot land to the writ Petitioner to the extent of 20 standard acres within three months and a further direction was also issued to deliver possession of the land to the writ Petitioner. Curiously, the learned Judges of the Division Bench did not consider appropriate even to quash the letter dated 21.6.1996 issued by the Appellant No. 2 herein and yet were pleased to direct not only the allotment of land as per his claim but also a direction for delivery of the possession within three months to the writ Petitioner/Respondents herein. The Respondents in the writ petition/the Appellant-State of Haryana herein, therefore, has preferred this appeal which was heard by us at length.