MEGHA RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - What a way to get the allotment of land and, thereafter, to remain in possession of the same.

(2.) THIS is a petition of 1990, wherein, even no notices are issued so far for all these nine years and the petitioner, who is found to be minor of aged 12 years at the time of allotment in 1977 by all the courts below, managed to remain in po- ssession of the land only because the Division Bench of this Court called for the record of the concerned court and authority on 4. 1. 1991 without issuing notice to the respondents. Record could not reach even in 1998 for more than 7 years and when the matter was placed before my learned Brother Hon`ble Dr. B. S. Chauhan, J. on 12. 10. 1998, his lordship observed that, "record was summoned but it has not come. Put up after four weeks. " Office was supposed to place this matter after four weeks, but it has been placed for admission only today after nine months of the passing of the order by my learned Brother on 12. 10. 1998.

(3.) THERE cannot be any quarrel with the law laid down by the Hon`ble Supreme Court in Birad Mal Singhvi`s case (supra ). However, in this case, there were two sets of evidence, one in favour of the petitioner and another in the form of School leaving certificate and also oral evidence of his father, who has clearly stated that in certificate age of his son was shown 12 years, however, he did not go for getting admission of his son- present petitioner and somebody else from the village had gone and he gave the date of birth because according to the teacher he was over age. Obviously this is a false explanation because there cannot be any di- fficulty in getting admission for a boy who is over age, the real difficulty would be when he is under age.