AVTAR SINGH RANDHAWA Vs. JOINT SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) , C&S This is a petition filed under section 33 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act) against the order dated 16.5.1996 passed by the Chief Settlement Commissioner Haryana whereby the offer of transfer of the land in dispute was dis-approved.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the House No. 5-H/75-NIT, Faridabad was originally allotted to one Shri Khilanda Ram who deposited 20% of the payment and died thereafter on 18.8.1964. The deceased Shri Khilanda Ram had also executed an agreement of sale in favour of Shri Santokh Singh on 15.10.1963 and had surrendered the vacant possession of the house to him. The Civil Court in a suit filed by Shri Ram Kishan and Shri Ram Sarup held them legal heirs as of Shri Khilanda Ram on 30.11.1966. They applied for the transfer of property. These two persons were asked by the Tehsildar (Sales) to deposit the balance amount. But they did not deposit the balance amount, nor they filed any objection. The Managing Officer Faridabad vide his order dated 22.7.1978 forfeited the amount already deposited and resumed the possession of the house. Shri Ram Sarup and Shri Ram Kishan challenged the above order of the Managing Officer in a revision petition before the Chief Settlement Commissioner, Haryana, who dismissed their petition vide order dated 16.3.1994 and remanded the case to the Tehsildar (Sales)-cum-Managing Officer Faridabad for examining the claim of Shri Avtar Singh and Shri Santokh Singh, the petitioners now for transfer of this house in their name under the Govt. policy dated 11.7.1988 vide his order dated 16.3.1994. He also observed that there seems to be no legal bar in transferring the house to them under the Govt. policy. The Tehsildar (Sales)-cum-Managing Officer in pursuance of the above order examined the case and found the present petitioners i.e. Shri Avtar Singh Randhawa and Shri Santokh Singh Randhawa in possession of the house since the year 1963. But he found that the nature of the property was changed from residential to commercial by setting up a workshop on the premises. He, thus, declined the transfer vide his order dated 26.6.1995. The revision petition filed by the petitioner before the Chief Settlement Commissioner, Haryana was also dismissed vide order dated 16.5.1996. It is against the above order that the present petition has been filed.

(3.) I have considered the submissions made by both sides and also examined the relevant record and facts of the case. There is no dispute regarding the possession of the petitioners of the house in question since the year 1963. It has been admitted by the respondent also. The only point of dispute in this case is whether the disputed property is a residential house or a commercial unit. Under the policy of 1988, only the residential houses are transferred. The Tehsildar (Sales) declined the allotment of this house to the petitioners on the ground that a workshop has been set up on the site and, therefore, it has become commercial and cannot be allotted. The Ld. Chief Settlement Commissioner, however, did not look into this matter and dismissed the case of the petitioners on the ground that the order of the Tehsildar had attained finality. However, from perusal of the records, it is revealed that the property in question is a residential house. It is amply proved from the receipts of the house tax up to the year 1995, which the petitioners had been paying to the Municipal Corporation. The house has been assessed as a residence and not as a commercial unit. In view of the above position I find merit in the case of the petitioners. It is also revealed that the petitioners had been agitating their claim before the Chief Settlement Commissioner since the year 1991. It, therefore, cannot he said that they failed to apply for the transfer of the property within the stipulated time. The petitioners are, therefore, allowed the transfer of this property on the usual terms and conditions. The necessary formalities should be completed by the Tehsildar (Sales) Faridabad as per rules. Announced. Petition allowed.