BHONRIA Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR REHABILITATION JAIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Article 226, Constitution of India.

(2.) The petitioners are 15 in number, all Balais, residents of a small village called Nagia Band Sikari, Tehsil Nagar, District Bharatpur. The case put forward on their behalf is that when the Band was constructed, they were called upon to occupy the land nearby and to make houses and to reside there so that the staff who had to be stationed near the Band in the jungle may have the advantage of their bsing close at hand. It was alleged that this occurred 40 years ago, and since then they were cultivate s of 199 bighas and 16 biswas of land as tenants under Meo Biswedars. It was alleged that the Meo landlords did not permit any entry in the revenue records recognising them as cultivators, but the petitioners nevertheless continued to cultivate the land. The Meo landlords abandoned their holdings, and migrated to Pakistan or other parts of India in the year 1947. Alter certain enquiry the petitioners were granted pattas of the land in 1948, and in the revenue records they were entered as defendants. It was alleged that subsequently some of the Meo landlords returned to Bharatpur, and the Deputy Director of Rehabilitation passed an order allotting the land, which had previously been granted to the petitioners in 1948, to the Meos, respondents 3 to 17, on 19-7-1952. The names of three respondents, viz., Taj Khan, Chhota and Malkhan, were subsequently struck off, and the petition is now directed against 12 respondents.

(3.) It was urged that no notice of the cancellation of the grant to the petitioners was ever given to them, that no enquiry whatsoever was made regarding the rights of the petitioners, and She petitioners were illegally asked by the order of the Deputy Director of Rehabilitation to vacate the land. It was prayed that the order of the Deputy Director of Rehabilitation dated 19-71952, he set aside, and directions be issued to the opposite parties, viz., Deputy Director of Rehabilitation, the Tehsildar, Nagar, and the 12 respondents, not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners, and such other direction be issued as may be necessary and appropriate.