JAIMAL Vs. COLLECTOR ALWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application by Jaimal and others under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. Their case was that they were given patta of 218 bighas and 11 biswas of land in village Khatoli on payment of certain money in premium. They remained in possession for five years. Thereafter the Tehsildar along with two other persons who were called members of local allotment committee ordered their ejectment. The land was said to have been abandoned by certain Muslims in 1947 who migrated to Pakistan. The applicant's case is that the Tehsildar and the Members of the Local Committee had no jurisdiction to pass orders of ejectment and this Court should therefore interfere.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel who argued this case for the applicants was not quite sure whether the applicants were owners of this property. , having purchased it in an auction sale. In the application, however, it was said that the applicants were Pattedars of the land for which they had paid Rs. 2000/- as premium and the land was stated to be evacuee property. We are of opinion that if the land in not evacuee property and the applicants have become owners of it by purchase, they have their remedy open in an ordinary Civil Court and sec. 46 of the Evacuee Property Act, 1950, will not come if their way if the property has been sold to them by the Custodian or Assistant Custodian. If the property is evacuee property, the question arises whether we should interfere with the orders of the Tehsildar who is ex-officio Assistant Custodian for his Tehsil. LEARNED Counsel urges that the order of the Local Allotments Committee is entirely without jurisdiction and we should interfere. LEARNED Government Advocate however, contends that the other persons associated with the Tehsildar are merely advisors and that the order is by the Tehsildar as the ex-officio Assistant Custodian. This seems to us to be the correct position.