RATTAN SINGH Vs. CHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall dispose of the following writ petitions :-

(2.) The facts leading to these three writ petitions are that Khasra Nos. 3497 to 3501 and 3544 to 3548 situated in Patti Taraf Rajputan, Tehsil Panipat, District Karnal, which formed the evacuee property, were allotted to respondent Nos. 3 to 5 in the year 1950. In the year 1951, some area including these Khasra numbers was acquired by the Government for the construction of Panipat-Gohana Road. The whole of the land acquired was not utilized by the Government for the construction of that road. Some part of it was released by the Government in favour of the Custodian Department, who at that time was the owner of the evacuee property. Out of the released area land measuring 6-14-1/4 standard acres was leased out by the Assistant Registrar-cum-Managing Officer, Jullundur on 5th of September, 1956 to Labh Singh. The Assistant Registrar-cum-Managing Officer, on 19th October, 1957, allotted the aforesaid area including an area of 8 Bighas 17 Biswas, comprising of Khasra Nos. 3497 min, 3498, 3544 to 3548, which had been released by the Acquisition Authorities to Labh Singh. Proprietary rights were also conferred on Labh Singh about this land on 30th of June, 1958. Thereafter, the petitioners in Civil Writ Petition No. 2488 of 1968 purchased 4 Bighas 10 Biswas of land in Khasra Nos. 3544, 3545 and 3546 from Labh Singh, vide sale deeds dated 21st of May, 1959 and 7th of January, 1964 for Rs. 15,000/-. The petitioners in Civil Writ Petition Nos. 2678 and 3045 of 1968 also purchased plots from Labh Singh for construction. The petitioners then raised constructions on the purchased area and developed it.

(3.) The respondent Nos. 3 to 5 on 3rd of August, 1966 filed an appeal under section 22 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954, (hereinafter called the Act), against the order of the Assistant Registrar-cum-Managing Officer, Jullundur, dated 5th of September, 1956, vide which he had leased out the land to Labh Singh. The Settlement Commissioner dismissed the appeal on 17th of January, 1968, as barred by time and also on the ground that proprietary rights had been conferred on Labh Singh. Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 then filed a revision petition before the Chief Settlement Commissioner, who accepting it cancelled the allotment of the entire area in the name of Labh Singh, including the area purchased by the petitioners, holding that the delay in filing the appeal had been condoned by the Settlement Commissioner on 27th of September, 1966. It was also held that the respondent Nos. 3 to 5 had remained agitating the matter and could not get the copies of the relevant orders. About the conferring of the proprietary rights on Labh Singh, the Chief Settlement Commissioner held that the order of allotment in favour of respondent Nos. 3 to 5 had not been cancelled for the land in question and it could not be allotted to Labh Singh and this allotment was void ab initio. He further held that though the allotment of Labh Singh in Chak Soem, Tehsil Kapurthala, had been cancelled in the year 1955, but he had not abandoned that allotment and the allotment in his favour at Panipat was not only irregular but also illegal. As there was no limitation for the setting aside of void allotments, these could be done at any time under section 24(2) of the Act. The Chief Settlement Commissioner then cancelled the proprietary rights in favour of Labh Singh. The vendee-respondents, though not a party before the Settlement Commissioner, were represented before the Chief Settlement Commissioner.