MOHINDER KAUR Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER (TAXATION)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking the quashing of the order of the Financial Commissioner (Taxation), Punjab exercising delegated powers of Central Government under Section 33 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, Chandigarh. The facts of the case are that one Teja Singh was allotted land in two villages, adjacent to the town of Jullundur in lieu of the land left by him in Pakistan. The Department found, on enquiry, that 0-9 standard acres of the land allotted were in excess of his allotment. Notice was given to Teja Singh for the cancellation of this area from his allotment. Teja Singh, in the meantime, died and was succeeded by his son Harcharan Singh who pursued the case before the authorities. At different levels of the Rehabilitation Department, different decisions were taken and during pendency of the proceedings till the final determination, 2 kanals of land out of it were sold by way of auction of Sunder Singh, respondent No. 4 on September 9, 1968. Harcharan Singh also died and was succeeded by the petitioners. The petitioners took the matter in revision to the Chief Settlement Commissioner, Jullundur, who, vide his order dated May 29, 1970 (Annexure 'B') upheld their claim. The only point raised before him was that the excess area should be allowed to be sold to the successors-in-interest of Teja Singh. Noticing the contention on behalf of Sunder Singh, respondent No. 4, the learned Chief Settlement Commissioner held as under :-

(2.) The Financial Commissioner (Taxation), Punjab decided the revision only on one point by upholding that the land was "urban area". "Urban area" has been defined in Rule 2(h) of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules, 1955 as under :-