IN THE COURT OF SHRI S.S.KHARA, PCS ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS, PUNJAB-CUM-MANAGING OFFICER (HEADQUARTER) KOTHI NO.280 SECTOR 10-A, CHANDIGARH.
Case No. Date of Institution Date of decision
MO/HQ/REH/2000/14 20.7.1999 23.07.2001
1. Joginder Singh son of Late Shri Harnam Singh resident of Maujgarh, P.O.Dharamkot, Tehsil zira, District Ferozepur.
2. Mohinder Singh
3. Mukhtiar Singh
sons of Late Shri Harnam Singh, both residents of village Kaila, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur, through their special Power of Attorney Joginder Singh son of Late Sh. Harnam Singh (Petitioner No.1) resident of Maujgarh, P.O. Dharamkot, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur.
The State of Punjab. ...Respondent
Petition for allotment of land.
Present: Sh. Dinesh Ghai Advocate for applicants/petitioners alongwith Sh. Joginder Singh applicant No.1.
Applicants/petitioners have filed this petition/application for allotment of land under the provisions of Displaced Persons (C & R) Act, 1954. In this petition/application it has been contended that father of the petitioners Sh. Harnam Singh son of Sohan abandoned land measuring 1 SA-11 Units in village Theh-Panju Tehsil & District Lahore and the petitioners are entitled to the land measuring about 1 SA-5 Unit after cut being the legal representatives of said Harnam Singh. The petitioners have neither got any land throughout the country nor they have got any compensation. The status of the petitioners/applicants is that of an unsatisfied claimant. It has been further contended that Rule 67-A of Displaced Persons (C & R) Rules, 1955 under which application was required to be filed before 31.12.1963 is no more applicable in light of the law laid down in the case of Naik Dalip Singh's case and in the case of Guran Ditta 1992-PLJ-Page 602. In the end it has been prayed that allotment be made to them under the rules and law in operation.
This petition has been supported by a photocopy of a certified copy of Jamabandi relating to village Panju Theh received on 22.3.1980 from the record room o/o DLR, Jalandhar. Statement of the applicants was recorded on 25.9.2000. Sh. Joginder Singh has stated in his statement that after migrating from Pakistan his father Settled in village Maujgarh Sub-Tehsil Dharamkot and he was allotted a residential house. His father had not filed any mutalba claim. At the time of partition of the country his father was about 40 years old and in Pakistan his father was in the service of the Army as Sepoy and he served in that capacity for 2-3 years. His father died on 26.10.1978. He (applicant Joginder Singh) remained in the service of Army from 1953 to 1970 and retired as Havaldar. He purchased 7 Acres in 1962 in village Maujgarh in the name of his father. The applicants had not filed the case earlier as they had financial constraints to fight the case. Before this case the applicants have not filed any application in this regard. Other applicants also got recorded their statement on 12.12.2000.
Arguments have been heard. Learned Counsel for the applicants has repeated the points raised in the petition and has urged that allotment be made as per due entitlement.
I have gone through the contentions of the petitioner very carefully. The applicants have admitted that their father had not filed any claim. In the entire petition not even a single word has been written about the reasons as to why their father upto 26.10.1978 i.e. till his death and thereafter the applicants upto 1999 remained in deep slumber. In the statement the only reason given in that they were lacking money for filing the case. This excuse is totally devoid of any merit. Joginder Singh applicant served in the Army during 1953-1970 and retired as Havaldar and in his statement he has clearly admitted that he had purchased 7 Acres in the year 1962 in the name of his father. So excuse of shortage of funds for not filing the case upto stipulated date and thereafter for getting the allotment is a total lie. Previously the father of the applicants had served in the Arrmy for some years and after that the applicant Joginder Singh remained in service and he pruchased 7 Acres land also in the name of his father and this fact clearly indicates the hollowness of the excuse given for not filing the case for 52 years.
Rule 67-A of Displaced Persons (C & R) Rules, 1955 had fixed a dead line upto 31.12.1963 for filing such claims. Learned Counsel has referred two authorities i.e. Naik Dalip Singh's case & Guran Ditta's case to prove that rule 67-A is not applicable. But the facts of the present case do not allow me to accept the contentions of the learned counsel in this regard. In both the cases the circumstances & facts were different. Naik Dalip Singh could not file the requisite claims within the stipulated period as he was minor/orphaned at that time. Similarly the facts of Gurun Ditta's case were totally different. So higher courts had held that rule 67-A is not attracted in these cases. In the present case the father of the applicants Sh. Harnam Singh was of 40 years of age at the time of partition of the country and he had served in the Army for some years and he remained alive till 28.10.1978. So there seems to be no genuine reason for not filing the mutalba claim. Learned Counsel has not been able to produce any authority from which is can be concluded that Rule 67-A has been struck down or declared ultra-vires. Since the rule 67-A is very much on the statue book so its applicability is to be seem on each cases with references to the facts & circumstances of the case. It appears that applicants are concealing some material facts or their father must have obtained cash compensation in lieu of land and due to this reason he may have not agitated the issue till his death in 1978. It do not appeal to mind as to why a prudent person of 40 years of age who left his land in Pakistan remained silent for more than 30 years till his death in October, 1978. Soon after the death of Harnam Singh the petitioners procured a copy of Jamabandi on 22.3.1980. Even after obtaining the copy they waited for more than 19 years to file the present case on 20.7.1999. So much so the applicants have chosen to place on file only a photo copy of the certified copy and it is a settled law that photocopy of a certified copy can't be read in evidence. It has also come to my notice that the same petitioners by using the photocopy of the same certified copy had filed another petition for claiming the land allegedly abandoned by Smt. Anand Kaur wd/o Sh. Dayal Singh by alleging that she was their grandmother and she had died issueless. This petition was dismissed on 12.12.2000 by me as the applicants/petitioners could not prove their contentions on any issue of facts in that case and that case was also found of totally doubtful nature. It seems that they/their shareholders are using the same certified copy to agitate such issues after so much long time by placing on file only a photocopy. Sh. Joginder Singh applicant who is present in person has not been able to give any convincing reply in this connection.
Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the present case and the detailed position discussed in the foregoing paras the application/petition is dismissed.
Announced in open court.
23.07.2001 ( S.S.KHARA )
Managing Officer (HQ)