LAWS(DLH)-2010-9-208

SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE

Decided On September 16, 2010
SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been preferred by the petitioners for quashing of the show cause notice bearing No.F/134/SDM/VV/2009/5780 dated 19th December 2009 issued by respondent no.2 and quashing of order dated 19th December, 2009 passed by respondent no.2 attaching the property bearing Khasra No.171/1 in the revenue estate of Village Bijwasan, New Delhi in respect of a piece of land measuring few biswas.

(2.) Brief facts relevant for the purpose of deciding this petition are that Mr. K. Puri, father of respondent no.3 in 1979, purchased an agricultural farm measuring 7 bighas 15 biswas in Village Bijwasan, New Delhi in Khasra No.2697/661/2, 3697/661/1 and 2699/662. In consolidation proceedings carried out in Village Bijwasan, it seems that respondent no.3s late father was given 8 bighas and 5 biswas of land in revenue estate of Village Bijwasan in Khasra No.171 which was in excess of original land held by him. The father of the petitioners Mr. R.S. Sharma filed an appeal bearing number 43 of 2000 in the court of Mr. H.P.S. Saran, Collector, Delhi against the order of Settlement Officer dated 9th December 1980. This appeal was decided on 8th May, 2001 by the Additional Collector and the Additional Collector set aside the order passed by SO(C) dated 9th December, 1980 and remanded the matter back to Consolidation Officer, Village Bijwasan with the directions that the appellant be allotted land after due process as his land had been allotted to some third person during consolidation proceedings. In pursuance of order dated 8th May, 2001, the Consolidation Officer of Village Bijwasan passed an order dated 17th September 2001 and held that father of respondent no.3 held excess land of 14 biswas which deserved to be withdrawn for the purpose of allotment to the petitioner no.1 to 4. On this wife of late K. Puri moved an application before the Settlement Officer/SDM, Vasant Vihar seeking declaration/ nullity of the proceedings initiated by the petitioners father and prayed further action regarding demarcation of land be deferred. Respondent no.4 also filed an appeal against the order of Consolidation Officer dated 17th September, 2001 praying therein for setting aside the order and for restoration of excess land of 14 biswas. The learned SDM/SD(C)/ Revenue Assistant, Vasant Vihar vide order dated 3rd July, 2002 decided the appeal and held that there was no illegality in the order dated 17th September 2001 passed by Consolidation Officer. Against the order of SDM, respondent no.3 preferred an appeal before the Court of Financial Commissioner. The Financial Commissioner dismissed the appeal vide order dated 27th December, 2002. Respondent no.3, aggrieved by the orders dated 27th December 2002, 3rd July, 2002, 17th September 2001 and 8th May, 2001, passed by the Financial Commissioner, Settlement Officer, Consolidation Officer and Additional Collector, preferred a writ petition before this Court being W.P.(C) No.267 of 2003 assailing these orders. The writ petition was disposed of quashing the order dated 17th September 2001 of the Consolidation Officer and order dated 3rd July, 2002 passed by Settlement Officer and order dated 27th December 2002 passed by the Financial Commissioner and a direction was given that the Consolidation Officer shall proceed to issue the notice to the writ petitioner as well as to the respondent and the parties shall be heard afresh and consolidation record shall be considered and a fresh decision shall be taken in light of observations made in the writ order. In pursuance of these directions passed by this Court, the Consolidation Officer again passed an order dated 5th February 2005 and held that excess land of 14 biswas allotted to respondent no.3s father in consolidation proceedings deserved to be withdrawn from Khasra No.171 reducing it from 8 bighas 5 biswas to 7 bighas 11 biswas which was the actual area of land pre-consolidation held by respondent no.3s father. This order was again challenged by respondent no.3 by filing a writ petition being W.P.(C) No.2844 of 2005. A Single Bench of this Court set aside the order dated 5th February 2005 and observed as under:

(3.) Against this order of learned Single Bench, an appeal was filed by respondent no.3 challenging the validity and legality of order dated 31st July, 2006. However, the Consolidation Officer, after the order of learned Single Bench, again heard the matter by giving notice to the parties and vide his order dated 25th September 2006, gave reasons for withdrawal of the excess land and held that withdrawal of excess land from Khata from father of respondent no.3 or successors was fully justified and warranted. The LPA preferred by the respondent no.3 against the order dated 31st July, 2006 being LPA No.1734 of 2006 was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 31st July, 2008.