FAREEDUNNISA BEGUM Vs. THE CUSTODIAN OF EVACUEE PROPERTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Custodian of Evacuee Property, the Jagir, Administrator and the Officer-in-Charge, Pension Payment Office (Respondents 1, 2 and 3 herein) to settle the claim of the petitioner in respect of the instalments of the commutation sum due and payable to her under the Hyderabad Jagirs (Commutation) Regulation, 1339 F. in Khata No. 1, and which have been unlawfully withheld.

(2.) The undisputed facts are as follows: The petitioner was a Jagirdar of the erstwhile Hyderabad State and after the abolition of 'Jagirs' the instalments of the commutation sum due to her were being collected by her agent as per the payment order made by the Jagir Administrator. This went on without let or hindrance up to the end of the first quarter of 1956-57 and the last payment was received by the petitioner's agent on 24-7-1956. Further, payments were, however, stopped on the ostensible ground that the petitioner had acquired Pakistan nationality.

(3.) The petitioner appears to have left India in April, 1955 and acquired Pakistan nationality, in July, 1955. But her property has not, however, been declared to be evacuee property under Section 7 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 ; and consequently her property has not vested in the Custodian for the State. Under Clause 7 (1) of the Hyderabad Jagirs (Commutation) Regulation, 1359 F., "the appropriate share of the commutation sum shall be payable to every person entitled to participate in the distribution thereof in such form and manner and at such time or times and in such number of instalments as may be prescribed." The petitioner has, therefore, a legal right to receive her commutation sum; and Article 31 (1) of the Constitution lays down : "No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law." This protection is available not only to the citizens of India but also to foreigners ; that is the true import of this constitutional guarantee. The petitioner has thus an unanswerable case and is justified in invoking the powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.