MOHINDER KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Mohinder Kaur is the daughter of Jeevan Singh, who migrated from Pakistan after partition of the country and was allotted agricultural land (evacuee) vide allotment No. AF-2/26/1 m measuring 9 standard acres and 3 Units vide Goshwara No. 5741/69 dated 17th March, 1970. The Tehsildar (Sales)-cum-Managing Officer, Moga, thereafter vide his order dated 15th September, 1970 allotted land measuring 147 kanals, as detailed in para 4 of the writ petition, situated in the revenue estate of Khiali, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur. This land was in possession of Hukam Singh son of Pala Singh and Kashmir Singh son of Tehal Singh and other persons. These persons challenged the allotment of Jeevan Singh on the ground that as per the policy of the Government, they were entitled to purchase this land as it was in their possession. However, their appeal was dismissed, but while parting with the judgment, the Assistant Settlement Commissioner, Jalandhar, directed the Assistant Registrar- (1)-cum-Managing Officer to scrutinise the allotment made to the respondent i. e. Jeevan Singh (predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner) so as to ensure that no irregularity had been committed. The petitioner eventually came to know that allotment was made to the persons who had filed the appeal and no further land was allotted to the petitioner. When Jeevan Singh passed away, the petitioner approached the concerned authorities for allotment of land, but nothing was done. Accordingly, she has come to this Court by way of this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) THE respondents, in their written statement, admitted the allotment, but took the stand that Jeevan Singh, father of the petitioner, never applied for possession of the land allotted, or for alternative allotment and that the petitioner applied after 17 years for possession of land allotted. The respondents also took the plea that original allotment file was not available in the office of the Tehsildar (Sales)-cum-Managing Officer; therefore, alternative allotment could not be made in favour of the petitioner.

(3.) WE find that it is a case where for no fault of the petitioner and her predecessor-in-interest, a valuable right has been denied to her. In spite of representations to the authorities by the petitioner and her father for possession of the land allotted to Jeevan Singh, possession was not delivered as some other persons were in illegal possession of the land allotted to Jeevan Singh and, later on, they were allotted the said land. It is settled principle of law that for fault of the authorities, no individual can be allowed to suffer. If the file is not traceable with the authorities concerned, it is not the fault of the petitioner. It is for the authorities to locate the file or get it reconstructed and make appropriate action against the defaulting officials. A perusal of the record goes to show that it is as far back as 11th August, 1988, Jeevan Singh (predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner) had applied for possession of the land. The petitioner is an illiterate lady. After the death of her father, she tried her level best to get the land allotted, but to her ill luck the office had slept over the matter taking the plea that the file was not traceable. Therefore, we find it a fit case where the petitioner should be allotted alternative land. For the aforesaid reasons, this petition succeeds and is allowed. The respondents are directed to allot alternative land to the petitioner within six months.