CHHINKU RAM Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. It arises out of these facts :

(2.) In the affidavit filed by Shri L. Isa Dass, Deputy Secretary to Government, Haryana, on behalf of respondents 1 and 2, it is alleged that the impugned orders were quite correct and could not be reviewed simply for the reason that subsequently, a Full Bench of this Court in Khan Chand's case gave a different interpretation of the law from that prevailing at the time of the assessment of the permissible area of the petitioner. In reply to Para 6(i) of the petition, it was alleged that 52 standard acres and 12-1/2 units of land had been inherited by the petitioner from his father, Hira Ram, mutation in respect of which was sanctioned in the petitioner's favour on 16.2.1954 on the basis of an entry, dated 13.9.1953, in the Patwari's Roznamcha. It was hinted that since the petitioner's father died sometime in 1953, Chhinku Ram could not claim a displaced person's rights in regard to the land inherited by him from his father.

(3.) In his separate return, Moola, respondent 3, reiterated that objection that the petitioner was not entitled to the rights of a displaced person in respect of the land inherited by him from his father, Hira Ram, in 1953. He pointed out that the review-application filed by the petitioner on 16.8.1965, before the Collector, Surplus Area, was time-barred by 4 years 4 months and 12 days and was rightly dismissed by the Collector on 29.11.1966.