RAJNI ARORA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed impugning the order of the learned Single Judge, inter alia, dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant on the ground of delay of almost 34 years. According to learned counsel appearing for the appellant there is no delay on the part of the appellant as the appellant has moved the appropriate authorities in the year 2000 when no communication of the partition was received by the appellant. As a matter of fact, this case demonstrates a complete lackluster attitude of the appellant. The main reliance of the learned counsel for the appellant is on order passed by Settlement Commissioner on 17.4.1971. The same is as follows:

(2.) This order of the Settlement Commissioner was also confirmed in appeal by the Joint Secretary on 30.9.1972.

(3.) As a matter of fact, the aforesaid order shows that the scheme which was submitted by the custodian and the partition scheme which was accepted by the competent officer vide order dated 29.6.1961 and the land which was allotted by the managing officer to the father of the appellant on 15.9.1962 was of no consequence once the said partition scheme was set aside. It was also observed in the aforesaid order that after the scheme has been set aside, the entire matter was to be again reopened and the partition of the composite property was to take place afresh. However, in the said order of the Settlement Commissioner the allotment of the father of the appellant was not cancelled considering the fact that if the allotment is cancelled, then, the allottee will be deprived of his valuable right of claiming alternative land. Therefore, if a right was given to the deceased for claiming an alternative land in lieu of his allotment, it was incumbent on the part of the deceased to have approached the appropriate authorities for alternative allotment. To say that they were waiting for some notice or some communication from some competent authority, is simply an after thought.