MATWAL SINGH Vs. MINISTER INCHARGE EVACUEE PROPERTY DEPTT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners who are allottees in possession of E.P. House No, 242 situate in Mohalla Talab KhatikanJammu were non -suited by the Custodian General vide his order dated 24 -3 -1965 holding that they had no locus standi to file the appeal against the order of restoration in favour of respondents 3 & 4. It was held that they could not agitate the order of restoration being licencees and were bound by the judgment delivered by the authorities under the J&K Evacuees (Administration of Property) Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act even in their absence. The review petition filed by the petitioners was accepted and it was held that respondent No.3 "in collaboration with her influential husband has obviously put up a false claim which has unfortunately sustained all these years but can sustain no longer after the truth has emerged in the long run." The order of the Custodian was set aside by declaring the property to continue to be evacuee property of Malik Maqbool Ahmed evacuee under the administration and management of the Custodian, E.P. Jammu. The revision petition preferred by respondent No. 3 was accepted by the Revenue Minister vide his order impugned in this writ petition against which the present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer for setting aside the same and restraining the respondents from evicting the petitioner from the house in their occupation as tenant of the Evacuee property Department.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the filling of the present petition are that a house known as "Maqbool Manzil" in Talab Khatikan, Jammu, which was the property owned by Malik Maqbool Ahmed was declared as evacuee property.

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 3 filed an application for deletion of the property from the register of evacuee properties on 28th February, 1953, in terms of Sec 8 of the Act The Custodian, instead of deleting the property is alleged to have restored the property holding it to be the joint property of the father of respondent No, 3 and her uncle She was held entitled to restoration of the property being the daughter and neice of the evacuees. The order of restoration however, could not be implemented as it had become the basis of corruption proceedings against the then Custodian, namely. Aga Altaf Hussain. Vide his order No. GR -127 -M of 1967 dated 9 -7 -1967, the Governor of the State was pleased to declare the said order of restoration as null and void with direction to the Custodian General to take legal action under the statutory powers for initiating legal action in the case. In 1974 the then Custodian General, Aga Iftikhar Ahmed, suo moto decided to examine the legality and propriety of the order of the Custodian under Sec. 30 -A of the Act Respondent No. 3 is alleged to have filed a writ petition in this Court challenging the order of the Custodian General and the order of the Governor. The writ petition was accepted holding that the Custodian General could not re -examine the order of the Custodian under Sec. 30 -A of the Act without first recalling the order, made by his predecessor Custodian General in appealus the Custodians order has virtually merged in the appellate order of the Custodian General. This Court further held that the Custodian General has power to review his order including the order of his predecessor suo moto at any time and for that purpose limitation of time was of no import. While disposing of the review petition the then Custodian General, S.M. Andrabi vide his order dated 25 -7 -78, quashed the proceedings and set aside the order of restoration against which the revision was preferred by respondent No. 3 The Minister incharge accepted the revision petition, hence this petition by the tenants of the property.