FAQUIR CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) , C&S This is a petition under rule 18 of the Package Deal Rules 1962 against the order dated 5.7.1998 passed by the Joint Secretary Rehabilitation-cum-Settlement Commissioner, Haryana.

(2.) THE detailed facts of this case have been given in the impugned order. However, briefly the facts are that the land in dispute was leased out to the petitioner for ten years from 1964-65 to 1975. The land was inferior evacuee property. The petitioner applied for the transfer of this land on the reserved price as per policy of the Government in the year 1982. His application was rejected by the Tehsildar (Sales) on 19.5.1989 on the ground that the petitioner did not fulfil the condition of transfer. The petitioner again made an application before the Chief Settlement Commissioner, Haryana. The Tehsildar (Sales) then transferred this land in favour of the petitioner vide orders dated 2.12.1992. The Settlement Officer (Sales), however, set aside the above orders of Tehsildar on the ground that the petitioner was not in continuous cultivating possession of this land since kharif 1975 onwards, vide his order dated 21.2.1994. But it appears that this order was not communicated to the petitioner in time and the land was put to open auction on 27.1.1995. One Sh. Sardara Ram S/o Sh. Mehar Chand offered the highest bid of Rs. 1,15,000/- and deposited the earnest money. The auction was confirmed by Settlement Officer (Sales) without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The order of Settlement Officer (Sales) was challenged by the petitioner before the Joint Secretary (Rehabilitation)-cum-Settlement Commissioner, Haryana who while agreeing with the Settlement Officer (Sales) dismissed the revision petition of the petitioner for the transfer of the land to him vide order dated 5.7.1998. The Joint Secretary (Rehabilitation) also cancelled the auction held on 27.1.1995 and confirmation by the Settlement Officer (Sales) in favour of Sh. Sardara Ram and ordered reauction of the land. The above order has been challenged by the petitioner by way of the present petition, putting forth his claim for the transfer of the land in dispute on the basis of his possession since the year 1975.

(3.) I have given a careful thought to the submissions made by both the sides and also examined the relevant record and facts of the case. It is revealed from the record that the land in dispute being an inferior evacuee land was leased out to the petitioner in the year 1964-65. The lease deed was executed on 27.1.1964. This has not been denied by the respondent. Copies of the Khasra Girdwawris in respect of this land from kharif 1968 to kharif 1995 and the copies of the jamabandis of the years 1982-83, 1987-88 and 1992-93 are available on the file. It is found that the petitioner has been continuously and without any break shown as "GAIR MAURUSI" in the cultivating column. The land has also been continuously cultivated except some crops particularly the rabi crop which could not be sown because of absence of irrigation facilities. The land, however, never remained vacant/unattended as it was being cultivated and crops were raised in the kharif season every year.