DES RAJ Vs. CHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the instant writ petition, the writ petitioner, claims, the, setting aside of the order made on 5.12.2009. The afore order was made by the Chief Settlement Commissioner, Rehabilitation, Shimla-2, in Case No. 1/2005-CSC, titled as, "State of H.P. versus Des Raj". Through the afore order, conveyance deed, No. 8-10- NTK, dated 9.1.2001, regarding Evacuee Land property comprisied in Khata No. 231,Khatauni No. 329/33, Khasra No. 174/1, presently khasra No. 174/2/7/1 and Khasra No. 170/1, measuring 752.33 Square Meters, as issued to Des Raj, S/o Chandu Ram, R/o Ward No. 3- Nurpur, District Kangra, was declared to be fake. Moreover, it was also declared, that the afore fakeness, rather became acquired by the alluded sale deed, as the sale consideration, was not deposited, in the treasury concerned, and also arose, from the factum of there being no office record, with respect to the making of the afore sale.

(2.) The learned counsel for the writ petitioner contends, with much vigor, before this Court, that issuance of sale certificate, borne in Annexure P-1, is supported by statutory provisions, borne in Section 20-(a), of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954, hereinafter referred to as "the Act". Provisions (supra), as carried in the Act, are extracted hereinafter:

(3.) However, the respondents in their reply on affidavit, contend with much vigor, before this Court, that sale certificate, borne in Annexure P-1, and, as issued with respect to the writ property, is ingrained with the deepest vice of voidness, as it is not supported by any existing records, rather supporting the conduct of public auction, by the officer, who drew Annexure P-1. Moreover, it is also contended in the reply, furnished to the writ petition, by the respondent, that even the sale consideration, mentioned in the sale certificate, became not deposited by the Officer, who purportedly conducted the sale through public auction of the writ property, and, that criminal proceedings are drawn against the officer concerned.