SAHIB SINGH Vs. TEHSILDAR ANOOPGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners were evacuees and in settlement of their claim, they were allotted land by the order dated March 24, 1966 vide Sanad No. 5659 supplimentary A letter was issued to the Tehsildar Anoopgarh dated March 24, 1966 informing him about the said allotment by the Settlement cum-Managing Officer, Sri Ganganagar. This letter interalia stated that the land which has been allotted to the petitioner was evacuee agricultural land acquired under S. 12 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, 1954. Ex. 1 is the letter addressed to Tehsildar, Anoopgarh by the Settle-ment-cum-Managing Officer, Sri Ganganagar giving the details of land and the name of allottees. Receipts of this letter by Tehsildar, Anocpgarh has not been disputed any where.

(2.) THE petitioner having failed to secure mutation in his name of the land in question, at the hands of Tehsildar in the first instance approached this Court by way of S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1839 of 1982 (Sahib Singh etc Vs. Tehsildar etc.) decided on March 3, 1982. THE Court directed that in compliance of the letter, the respondents are duty bound to dispose of the applications, if any made within a reasonable period; and if the Tehsildar does not dispose of the application then the petitioner can take the proper action according to law.

(3.) THE same view was taken by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Bishan Das Vs. Union of India (3) wherein it was observed as under : - "we, therefore, allow the appeal and set aside the order dated October 21, 1973 of the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the petitioner-appellant. A direction is issued to respondent No. 4 (Tehsildar Colonisation Gharsana) not to proceed with the proceedings under S. 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (No. XV of 1956) and the aforesaid respondent is further restrained from interfering with the possession of the petitioner over the land in question of Khasra No. 2 covered by the letter Ex. 1. Respondent No. 4 is further restrained from making any order of ' allotment of the land in question (Khasra No. 2) covered by the letter Ex. 1".