Rajendra Pal vs Union of India (UOI) and Others

V.G. Palshikar, J.—By this petition, the petitions have challenged the orders passed by the Authorities under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act''), by which the allotment of 12 bighas and 10 biswas of land infavour of the petitioners have been cancelled.

A show cause notice was issued to the petitioners asking them to show cause why the allotment of this land in their favour should not be cancelled for their non-payment of the price of the land allotted. The petitioners showed cause and pointed out that for non-payment, such cancellation is not warranted. The provisions of Section 21 of the Act, are sufficient to recover the money payable by the petitioners to the State and, therefore, no cancellation need be made. Inspite of that, an order was made cancelling the allotment in favour of the petitioners. The petitioners'' predecessor, therefore, filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority, which vested in the Collector and challenged the order passed u/s 22 of the Act. The Collector considered the rival contentions raised, and remanded the matter to the Managing Officer, after setting aside the order dated 2.12.75 for considering the reply of the appellants and to decide the case in accordance with law. In this order, the Appellate Authority had observed as under:

Allotment of land in Anand-Ka-Bera is a separate issue and being a subsequent event to this allotment is not relevant for cancellation of the land allotted. The only relevant point in this case could be the reasons mentioned in the show cause notice.

It was, thus, held by the Appellate Authority that only on the point mentioned in the show cause notice the cancellation can take place. This order has become final as it was not challenged by any person affected by it.

The Managing Officer, on remand, again considered the matter and ordered cancellation of the lease, again taking into consideration the allotment of 125 bighas of land. He has observed thus:

;|fi ;g issue vc bl ekeys esa ugha gS fQj Hkh blls vkcaVh dk vkpj.k rks Li"V gks gh tkrk gS fd mlus foHkkx ds lkFk /kks[kk /kM+h djds rF;ksa dks Nqikdj uktk;t ykHk mBkus dh dksf''k''k dh gSA

It will, thus, be seen that the Managing Officer was obviously highly influenced by the question of subsequent allotment. This could not be done in view of the specific direction of the Appellate Authority.

Again, therefore, an appeal was filed against this order before the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority confirmed and order of cancellation, after affirming the finding of the Managing Officer and the observations of the Managing Officer that the conduct of the appellants is not clean as will be seen from concealment of the allotment of 125 bighas of land in Anupgarh Tehsil. The appeal was, therefore, dismissed. Again the Appellate Authority has taken into consideration, as a vital circumstance, the fact of subsequent allotment. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioners, this could not be done.

A revision application u/s 24 was, there after, filed by the petitioners challenging these orders and even the revisional authority confirmed the orders on the same consideration. It will, thus, be seen that all, the Appellate and the Revisional Authorities have mis-directed themselves in the matter of consideration of the case of the petitioners against cancellation of the allotment made in their favour. In view of the fact that first order passed by the Appellate Authority on 7.5.77 having become final, the question of allotment of 125 bighas of land from Anupgarh Tehsil could not be considered to have any bearing on the issue. The show cause notice was issued for cancellation of the allotment on the alleged non-payment of the allotment money. That being a notice to the petitioners, the cancellation will have to depend on their answering that notice. No other point could be agitated or considered for cancellation of the allotment. The matter is therefore, remanded to the Settlement Officer for deciding in accordance with law and that he shall not take into consideration the allotment of land in Anupgarh Tehsil.

The orders impugned in this petition, as a result of the above observations, are quashed and set aside. The Settlement Officer and the Managing Officer, Sriganganagar, is directed to decide the case in light of the above observations, as soon as possible in the year 1995.