PURAN SINGH Vs. JOINT SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) , C&S (Reh.) The above two petitions have been filed by the petitioner under Rule 18 of the State Rules for disposal of evacuee property against the order dated 26.11.1997 passed by the Joint Secretary, Rehabilitation-cum-Settlement Commissioner, Haryana, whereby the application of the petitioners for restoration of their cases was dismissed. The facts and issues involved in both the cases are similar in nature, therefore, both these cases are decided together by a single order.

(2.) THE petitioners have claimed that the land in dispute was given to them on lease in the year 1969 as this land was inferior evacuee land. Possession of the land was also given to them vide Rapat No. 282 dated 10.3.1970. The lease was for 10 years i.e. from 1968 to 1978. The petitioner had also deposited some amount in the year 1975. But the entries were not made in the Jamabandi. The land then went into river Yamuna and it was retrieved only in the year 1989-90. After that the Girdawari of the land was entered in the name of the petitioner. Necessary entries were also made in the Jamabandi for the year 1989-90. The petitioners made application to the Tehsildar and the Settlement Officer, Ambala for transfer of this land to them under the Govt. policy. But they refused to allot this land and filed their applications vide orders dated 31.7.1995 and 25.3.1996 on the ground that they do not figure in the revenue record since Kharif 1975. The petitioner filed appeals against the order before the Joint Secretary, Rehabilitation-cum-Settlement Commissioner, Haryana which were dismissed in default on 2.4.1997. Application for restoration of the appeal was also dismissed on 26.11.1997. Present petitions have been filed against the above orders.

(3.) ON careful consideration of the submissions made by the petitioner and examination of the facts of the case, I am inclined to feel that the petitioner should be given a fair chance of hearing. They appeared to be very poor persons and were not able to complete their papers and get the entries made in their names in respect of the lease of the land in dispute. The entries in their pass-book reveal that they were leased out this land in the year 1969. It is also a fact that land is subject to river action and it has been shown as gair mumkin cho (Sailab) from the year 1974-75 to 1988-89 as per the copy of the revenue record made available by the petitioner placed on the file. I would, therefore, like the J.S. (Reh.)-cum-Settlement Commissioner, Haryana to look into their cases in detail. Cases are therefore, remanded to the Settlement Commissioner for a decision on merit, after hearing the parties. Order accordingly.