GIAN CHAND Vs. STATE OF HP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Deepak Gupta, J.

(2.) THE petitioners purchased some land from one Shri Yudhvir Singh. Unfortunately, Sh. Yudhvir Singh, much prior to the sale, had already declared this land to be surplus in terms of the HP Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 and as such this land had vested in the State. It, however, appears that possession remained with the petitioners and they constructed some houses on the said land. One of the petitioners served in the C.R.P.F and retired in the year 1986. THEreafter in the year 1987 he filed a civil suit claiming that he is owner in possession of the land. THE civil suit was dismissed on the ground that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction in view of the fact that the land had been declared surplus by the original owner.

(3.) THE grievance of the petitioners now is that the State of Himachal Pradesh has not considered the case of the petitioners by taking a sympathetic view of the matter as directed by the learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals). It is not disputed that the order the learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals) has attained finality. It also appears from the record that the petitioners are in possession of the land in question. It is apparent that they have been duped by the original owner. Keeping these factors in view, the learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals) had directed that the State should consider/take a sympathetic view of the matter. Once such an order was passed, the Principal Secretary (Revenue) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh was required to consider the matter in the light of the observations made by the learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals). It appears that nobody at the State level has dealt with the matter and only the Deputy Commissioner has considered the matter and has only said that it be filed. He should have considered the matter keeping in view the humanitarian grounds involved.