INTIZAMIA COMMITTEE Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN revision 84 of 1996 against the order dated 13.11.1996 of Divisional Commissioner Kashmir in appeal No. 130/92, while upholding the order of Divisional Commissioner of setting aside order of Dy. ommissioner/Collector Budgam of allotment of 5 marlas of land in Khasra No. 348 situated at Baghat Barzulla in favour of Ab. Rashid Rather, respondent No. 6, the Financial Commissioner dismissed the revision on 26.10.1997 with the observation : - -

(2.) THIS observation read as direction in the order of revision of Financial Commissioner is challenged in this petition and is prayed to be quashed and further respondents 5 & 6 (allottees, of 5 marlas of land to each of the two respondents) are solicited to hand over vacant possession of the land to petitioner and for the purpose writ of mandamus, is prayed for.

(3.) ABDUL Rashid Rather respondent No. 6, was allotted 5 marlas of land in survey No. 348 recorded as "Shamilat Deh Mehfooz Kahcharai" situated in village Baghat Burzulla of tehsil Badgam by Dy. Commissioner Badgam under Order No. 433 -35/SQ dated 38.01.1991. By another order respondent No. 5 was also allotted 5 marlas of land in Khasra No. 346 min at Baghat Barzulla by District Collector Badgam under order No. 903 -3/SQ dated 24.10.1988. Both allotments were made under the Scheme called "20 Point Programme" meant for allotment of land for construction of houses to eligible persons below poverty line who qualify for such allotment under the Scheme. However, Gh. Nabi Bhat has filed this writ petition on behalf of Intizamia Committee Masjid Sharief as its Chairman. He also moved on application for cancellation of the order. Simultaneously he also filed an appeal against both orders. This appeal, after the parties were engaged in bouts of litigation for condonation of delay before Appellate and Revisional Forums and also before the writ Court, was finally disposed of by Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir vide his order dated 13.11.1996 (annexure K), holding the allotment of the said land to Ab. Rashid Rather not legal, as he has not qualified for the land under the Scheme and provisions of J&K, Land Revenue Regulations Act 1946. The Common Lands Regulations Act was held not applicable as the land in question lies within the Municipal limits of City Srinagar. Against this order, revision was filed before Financial Commissioner. The Revisional Forum upheld the impugned order. However, the Financial Commissioner noted that the then Dy. Commissioner Badgam allotted the land to two respondents pursuant to policy initiative of the Govt. of India to provide land for house sites to people living below poverty line when 20 Point Programme was launched for the purpose. Both the petitioners have been given the plots on the basis that they are landless people. These small plots of land were under their possession prior to 1971. On both plots they have build their houses. Petitioners father who did possess the land sold it during his life time and obviously petitioner are stated not to own this land. They have no right or title to their fathers land during his life time. The unauthorised occupation of the land in possession of petitioners since 1971, could not be disturbed. The enquiry conducted by the Dy. Commissioner is found imperfect by the Revisional Forum with regard to question if petitioners were landless workers/labourers. It is also observed that contradictory reports eminate from the filed agency as to whether petitioners father did possess the land or did sell whole land. In any case the Revisional Forum has found that no proper enquiry was conducted and that the petitioners did not qualify for the land and 20 Point Programme. Yet on closer look of the matter, the Financial Commissioner found that the balanced view on grounds of equity and factors, germane to the question show that the respondent do make out a case for regularisation of allotments required to be processed separately by the Dy. Commissioner on payment of evaluated and assessed compensation.