K N KAPOOR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution is to quash an order passed by Shri Rajni Kant, Officer with delegated powers of the Central Government under the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act. 1954 (Act No. 44 of 1954) (hereinafter called as the Act), dated 4-6-1968, refusing to interfere under section 33 of the Act with the order passed by the Settlement Commissioner Shri Sudarshan Aggarwal with delegated powers of Chief Settlement Commissioner dated 30-4-1968, taking suo mota proceedings for cancellation of sale of a bungalow in plot No. 26 N. H. Ill, Township, Faridabad as well as sale certificate dated 18-1-1963 issued in favour of the petitioner K. N. Kapoor. The facts which led to the filing of this petition may be briefly noticed.

(2.) One Alam Chand, whose legal representatives arc respondents Nos. 4 to 7 in this petition, purchased the said property at a public auction held on 31-12-1957 wherein he was the highest bidder in the sum of Rs. 8050 whereupon he was issued a notice requiring him to pay balance of the bid price. In accordance with the rules, to which reference will be made later, he had to deposit. 10 per cent of the purchase money and in the event of his' holding a verified claim (as Alam Chand did) he could execute a bond to that extent.

(3.) Passing over the details of what happened at this stage it is sufficient to note that Alam Chand did not deposit the sale amount as required by the rules because (as it turned out) he had withdrawn the entire amount of compensation due to him in the verified claim No. P/Gurgaon/215421/2421. A statement to this effect was made by Alam Chand himself in the application which he had made, on 1-2-1960 (vide p. 8-F of file No. B. 26/N.H./111). He had categorically admitted therein that he had realised the entire compensation on 18-1-1960 and that he may be informed about the orders concerning the whole of the amount to be deposited by him in cash. It may be noticed, even at this stage, he could not have had any difficulty in the matter of knowing for what amount he had bid; it was Rs. 8050; the 10 per cent earnest money, for which he had given the bond to be adjusted out of his compensation amount, was no longer available after he had withdrawn the entire amount of compensation due to him- As would appear from a later statement which Alam Chand made before the Assistant Settlement Officer on 29-4-1960 (vide p. 5-N of the same file) he had intimated that he received a sum of Rs. 1000 in cash and Rs. 1740 in the form of National Planning Savings Cetrificates. Having made this admission he had no option but to pay the entire sale price, including the 10 per cent which he was bound to pay initially- This position was, in fact, conceded by him when he made a request that he may be granted 20 days time for paying the said amount. It is also seen from the file from a note dated 24-5-1960 (despite that portion of the file being torn) that Alam Chand had not appeared until that date or made the deposit. It may be further noticed that Alam Chand died on 13-4-1961.