BALBIR SINGH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three writ petitions involving common questions of law and fact were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The petitioners are said to be tenure holders / owners / bhumidhars of agricultural holdings situated in Village Kanjhawala. The said village is in rural area of Delhi established under Section 150 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 ( hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as, 'the Reforms Act' ). It is not in dispute that a notification under Section 14(1) of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as, 'the said Act* ) was issued on 08.09.1993 for commencement of proceedings with the object of consolidation of holdings in the said village allegedly for better cultivation of land therein. According to the petitioners, the consolidation of holdings in the said village had taken place in the year 1952-53. The petitioners contend that some of them owned farm houses, which had been sanctioned in terms of Section 336 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act ( hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as,'DMC Act'). According to the petitioners, they are paying tax to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi ( in short, 'the Corporation ) wherefor the rateable value in respect of each farm house has been determined at Rs.l,55,900/-'w.e.f. 01.04.1992. The said farm houses are also assessed for property tax by the Corporation.

(3.) According to the petitioners, the said farm houses are required to be reserved as 'Kenyami' in the aforesaid consolidation proceedings. Although on several occasions, the petitioners prayed that appropriate order be passed in relation to the said farm houses declaring the said to be 'Kayami' in nature and despite promises made in this behalf by the competent authorities, no action had been taken. It is stated that the petitioners have filed, applications before the Settlement Officer in terms of Section 36 of the said Act, which are yet to be disposed of.