Text Size

  • Increase
  • Decrease
  • Normal

Current Size: 100%

Allotment case of Dalip Singh

GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND REHABILITATION (POLICY & LEGAL BRANCH)

File No.P-3/118(927)97/

                                                                                   ORDER

The matter herein pertains to allotment of additional land to one Dalip Singh son of Ganga Singh in respect of land abandoned by him in Pakistan during the course of Partition. An application dated 10.12.1996 was made on behalf of Dalip Singh son of Ganga Singh resident of Model Town Talwara by one Manjeet Singh son of Hazara Singh resident of Nadala, Tehsil Bholath, District Kapurthala stating therein that Dalip Singh had abandoned land in village Galgitti/513 and village Darpiala/512 in tehsil and district Gujranwala in Pakistan. In lieu of this he had received 8 SAs 8¾ units in village Lakhan Kalan/139. He had taken possession of the said land and was in occupation thereof. On procuring a jamabandi of the land left by him in Pakistan he had discovered that he had been allotted 1 SA less land. The deficiency should, therefore, be made good. He attached with his application a copy of jamabandi for village Galgitti/513, tehsil and district Gujranwala, a copy of Sanad Taqsim Arazi Matruka and new “chhant” for consideration. An unattested photostat copy of a Power of Attorney purported to be from Dalip Singh son of Ganga Singh in favour of Manjeet Singh son of Hazara Singh was also attached therewith. This application is shown as received in the office of the Managing Officer on 9.1.1997 and the matter was fixed for 28.1.1997. On the said date Hazara Singh came present on behalf of Manjeet Singh whereupon the Managing Officer-cum-Tehsildar, Hari Singh ordered a 1-D report to be included in the file. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned to 18.2.1997 when Sh. Kuldip Singh, Senior Assistant was ordered to bring a report from the register known as 1-D lying in the Land Claims Office, Jalandhar. This official re-calculated the entitlement and prepared a statement on 18.3.97 showing that there was a deficiency of 0.15½ unit in the allotment made to Dalip Singh son of Ganga Singh. On the basis of the report of Kuldip Singh, assistant, the Managing Officer passed order dated 26.3.1997 to the effect that the said Dalip Singh son of Ganga Singh should be allotted land measuring 0 SA 15½ units. Thereafter the Managing Officer, HQ sent the case to the Government for clearance.

2. On examination of the record some inadequacies and irregularities were found in the order of the Managing Officer, prima facie establishing need for interference under Section 33 of the Displaced Persons ( Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act. Before taking any action in the matter it was considered necessary to summon both the applicant Dalip Singh and his attorney Hazara Singh. (On 18.10.1996, Dalip Singh son of Ganga Singh had purportedly executed a Power of Attorney in favour of Manjeet Singh son of Hazara Singh, but thereafter another Power of Attorney had been executed on 8.8.1997 in favour of Hazara Singh son of Labh Singh). They were called for hearing on 19.3.2000. On the aforementioned date Hazara Singh, presented himself alongwith a person claiming to be Dalip Singh son of Ganga Singh. While Hazara Singh was identified by one Balwant Singh son of Dewan Singh lamabardar of village Bamuwal, the parentage of Dalip Singh was not confirmed by the said lamabardar. The statements of all the three persons were recorded and on the basis of a perusal of the record and these statements the following irregularities have emerged in relation to the claim of Dalip Singh:-

  • The claim was initiated by one Manjeet Singh son of Hazara Singh who claimed to be the Power of Attorney of Dalip Singh. Dalip Singh who was presented in my office by Hazara Singh father of Manjeet Singh denied having given any Power of Attorney to Manjeet Singh. He also did not remember when he had executed a Power of Attorney in favour of Hazara Singh. Dalip Singh also stated that he had never been a resident of Model Town, Talwara and lived in Lakhan Kalan only, whereas in the Power of Attorney in favour of Manjeet Singh, Dalip Singh was shown as resident of Talwara.
  • The Managing Officer’s file shows that the claim of Dalip Singh son of Ganga Singh was initiated on an application filed by Manjeet Singh son of Hazara Singh filed on his behalf. The case was fixed for 28.1.97, 18.2.97, 20.3.97 and 26.3.97. On the first two occasions Hazara Singh father of Manjeet Singh was shown present (though he was not a Power of Attorney at that time) and on the later two occasions Manjeet Singh was shown present. Dalip Singh never appeared in person before the Managing Officer at any stage during the proceedings. The claim of Dalip Singh was decided purely by proxy in his favour without insisting on his presence even once. Hazara Singh procured a Power of Attorney from the alleged Dalip Singh five months after the Managing Officer Hari Singh decided the case in favour of Dalip Singh son of Ganga Singh.
  • Although Hazara Singh admits to having a son by the name of Manjeet Singh who, he claims, stays abroad, he has not been able to explain why Dalip Singh denied having executed any Power of Attorney in favour of his son Manjeet Singh especially when he claims to know Hazara Singh well.
  • The record shows that originally the claimant Dalip Singh son of Ganga Singh settled in Nabha and an allotment was made in his favour in village Moonak, district Sangrur. This allotment was cancelled and another allotment was made in village Hamira. Even this allotment was cancelled and finally allotment was made in village Lakhan Kalan in District Kapurthala. Application dated 10.12.96 does not mention the two earlier allotments and their cancellation. Dalip Singh who appeared on 19.3.2001 when cross-examined made a mention of an allotment in village Moonak but made no mention of an allotment in Hamira.
  • Considering that the allotment was made thrice and cancelled twice and during this period nothing was found wrong with the calculatiions relating to the claim of Dalip Singh it was the bounden duty of Kuldip Singh to prepare a comparative statement of both new and old calculations to show where the mistake had arisen, and how an additional area of 0 SA-15½ units had been found due to Dalip Singh. No such comparison was made by Kuldip Singh. Even then the Managing Officer chose to rely implicitly on his report without verifying facts himself or through any senior functionary of the office of Director Land Records.
  • Dalip Singh has stated in his application dated 10.12.1996 that he is owner and in possession of 8 SAs 8¾ units allotted to him in village Lakhan Kalan. This is a mis-statement. A perusal of the record for the said village shows that Dalip Singh sold his entire land through five registered sale deeds dated 1969, 1970 and 1974. All these registration sale deeds carry thumb impression of Dalip Singh, whereas the present Dalip Singh and the Dalip Singh who has given a Power of Attorney first to Manjeet Singh and then to Hazara Singh signs in Gurmukhi script. It is also strange that though Dalip Singh should claim to be in possession of the land he should state before me that he does not recall since when he was in possession thereof and also states that he does not remember who filed a claim on his behalf; he states that he was 3 years old when he migrated from Pakistan.
  • The statements of Hazara Singh and Balwant Singh and Dalip Singh recorded on 19.3.2001 are very revealing. Dalip Singh has stated before me that he went to the office of Director, Land Records, Jalandhar to get some details about his family as he had been told by someone that his grandfather’s brother had died issueless. There he met one Wazir Chand, petition writer who told him that since he did not know the name of his grandfather’s brother he could not help him in the matter. Nevertheless the said Wazir Chand prepared an application in Dalip Singh’s name after perusal of the office record after submitting which he came back and executed a Power of Attorney in favour of Hazara Singh son of Ram Singh resident of Nadala for chasing the claim further as he was a frequent visitor to various officers and was an influential man.

Dalip Singh who was presented by Hazara Singh before me projects himself to be the son of Ganga Singh and also admits that Hazara Singh is his Power of Attorney. But Hazara Singh in the opening sentence of his recorded statements says he (Hazara Singh) is Power of Attorney of Dalip Singh son of Dula Singh. Hazara Singh also states that he does not know the name of grand-father of the said Dalip Singh.

Balwant Singh son of Diwan Singh lambardar of village Bamoowal, states that he knows Dalip Singh who is present in the office of Financial Commissioner Revenue and he knows that he is a resident of Lakhan Kalan, but states that he does know the name of Dalip Singh’s father.

Incidentally the name of grandfather of Dalip Singh is mentioned as Roor Singh, whereas in his own statement Dalip Singh says he is the grandson of Boor Singh.

3. The evasive statements made before me throw serious doubts on the identity of Dalip Singh. The only thing that emerges with certainty is that the claim has been master-minded by Hazara Singh, who got a Power of Attorney executed first in favour of his son Manjeet Singh and later on in his own favour. Surprisingly the Managing Officer found nothing wrong with a claim being projected after a lapse of more than 40 years, and that too through a power of Attorney rather than the claimant personally. The Managing Officer did not find it necessary to summon Dalip Singh even once and chose to rely on Hazara Singh and the 1-D statement prepared by Kuldip Singh, who was a junior functionary in the Revenue Department. The fact that Hazara Singh repeatedly appeared before the Managing Officer even though the Power of Attorney was in favour of his son Manjeet Singh shows that Hazara Singh was known to the Managing Officer and/or was a familiar figure around the Department. Hazara Singh is also Power of Attorney in another claim relating to Beant Kaur daughter of Dhanda Singh also of Kapurthala. That claim has also been found to be bogus on 24.1.2001.

4. In the totality of circumstances it becomes quite evident that the claim has been agitated in a fraudulent manner by Hazara Singh who was so sanguine in the belief that no questions would be asked that he did not hesitate to present a person of doubtful identity even before me, and also brought with him a Lambardar of another village to establish his own identity. It was only when it was found by him that the statements of all three were being reduced to writing that both Balwant Singh and Hazara Singh got ­­cold feet and failed to certify that the person present was Dalip Singh son of Ganga Singh. The claim of Dalip Singh as espoused by Manjeet Singh and thereafter by Hazara Singh does not stand the test of detailed scrutiny and the order of the Managing Officer is accordingly set aside.

To be communicated by Registered post, as also through process.

(SHYAMA MANN)

Chandigarh, dated

Financial Commissioner Revenue,

the 8th May, 2001 Punjab.

Hon'ble Revenue Minister

Hon'ble Minister-In-Charge
Shri. Gurpreet Singh Kangar

 


 

Special Chief Secretary, Department of Revenue, Rehabilitation and Disaster Mangement
Shri. Karan Bir Singh Sidhu, IAS

What's New

Regarding Additional Stamp Duty
Notification dated 30-01-2019_regarding amendment in Schedule I-A of Central Act 2 of 1899 : The Indian Stamp (Punjab Amendment) Ordinance, 2019
Pilot launch of Demarcation by using Electronic Total Station in five districts Patiala, SAS Nagar, Ludhiana, Amritsar and Jalandhar.
Launch of Online Registration (NGDRS) as pilot project at Moga and Adampur on 17th November, 2017.
Online Registration (NGDRS) is implemented in all Sub Registrar Offices of 22 Districts of State of Punjab