SUKH RAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petitions, being Petition Nos. 1548/2001 and 3854/2000, challenge the common order dtd. 3/10/2000 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Bikaner in Revision Case Nos. 3/1999 and 4/1999, whereby Revision Case No. 3/1999 was dismissed and Revision Case No. 4/1999 was allowed. Consequently, the order dtd. 31/5/1999 passed by the District Magistrate-cum-Settlement Commissioner, Nagaur, and the order dtd. 15/6/1972 passed by the Managing Officer, Nagaur, were set aside.

(2.) The issue involved in both the writ petitions is one and the same. Accordingly, both the writ petitions are being decided by this common order. The Writ Petition No.148/2001 has been filed by Sukhram, the purchaser of a part of the subject property involved in the present litigation. He purchased the land from Tulsiram by way of a registered sale deed. Tulsiram, in turn, had purchased the said land from Kalu Khan on the strength of a Sanad issued by the Managing Officer under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1954') The Writ Petition No.854/2000 has been filed by Ibrahim Khan, the son of Kalu Khan ( to whom the Sanad was granted under the Act of 1954) along with Tulsiram and Bhanwarlal, who are purchasers from Kalu Khan by registered sale deeds on the basis of the said Sanad. During the pendency of the writ petitions, it appears that all the original petitioners have passed away and their legal heirs were brought on record.

(3.) At the outset, it may be noted that the present litigation has a checkered history spanning over 53 years. Such prolonged duration is attributable to multiple remand orders passed by various appellate and revisional authorities. The present proceedings arise out of suo motu proceedings initiated by the District Magistrate-cum-Settlement Commissioner, Nagaur, against the grant of Sanad dtd. 15/6/1972 by the Managing Officer in respect of properties forming part of the compensation pool under the Act of 1954. The District Magistrate-cum-Settlement Commissioner is the appellate authority under Sec. 22 of the Act of 1954 against orders passed by the Settlement Officer or Managing Officer under the Act. The foundation for the suo motu action of the District Magistrate-cum-Settlement Commissioner was a notice dtd. 7/10/1972. The contents of the said notice indicate that the suo motu proceedings were initiated for cancellation of the Sanad granted by the Managing Officer on the grounds that the subject properties were not custodian lands and that the allottee was not in possession of the lands for which the Sanad had been granted. On these grounds, a notice dtd. 7/10/1972 was issued to show cause as to why the Sanad should not be cancelled. The said notice was issued only to Kalu Khan, to whom the Sanad had been granted. In response to the said notice, the applicant, Kalu Khan, sought an adjournment of the proceedings on the ground of his illness. However, the District Magistrate-cum-Settlement Commissioner, by order dtd. 18/10/1972, cancelled the Sana d by merely noting the request made by Kalu Khan regarding his illness, without examining the nature of the lands or whether the ground for adjournment was genuine.