ANANT RAM THAKUR Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Anant Ram Thakur filed a writ petition under Article 226, read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The respondents are: the Revenue Minister Himachal Pradesh, the Commissioner (Revenue), the Secretary (Revenue), the Deputy Commissioner and out Shri Khub Ram. It is contended that the petitioner was granted certain land under "Nautor" in the year 1966. The petitioner accordingly went in possession and planted an orchard. It is stated that the petitioner has invested near about Rs. 1 lac in planting the orchard. The respondents, according to the petitioner being governed by political motives cancelled the 'Nautor' in 1970 and the petitioner was likely to be deprived of the land. Accordingly he filed this writ petition.

(2.) On 16-1-1971, the petitioner has died and it is stated that he has left a 'Will' in which he has made his son Chandra Sen Thakur to be his sole heir to this property. Now Chander Sen Thakur has applied for substitution as legal representative of the deceased petitioner.

(3.) The respondents contend, that right to sue has not survived in favour of Chander Sen Thakur because, according to them, a personal relief was claimed by the petitioner which has extinguished after his death. It is then contended by them that the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code (Order 22) are not applicable to writ proceedings. In short it is stated that the legal representative cannot be brought on record.