SH. S.S.KHARA PCS DEPUTY SECRETARY REVENUE-CUM-MANAGING OFFICER (HQ) DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION, PUNJAB, (KOTHI No.280 SEC. 10-A, CHANDIGARH)
Petition No. Date of Institution Date of decision.
MO/HQ/ID/32 11.7.1995 16.4.2001
Pritam Singh son of Dhian Singh resident of Royal Majri, Tehsil & Distt. Ropar.
State of Punjab, Rehabilitation Department, Chandigarh.
Petition u/s 25(2) of the DP(C & R) Act, 1954, for making up the deficiency of land allotment and also for allotment of alternative land for allotted area, in lieu of the land left in Pakistan, by the predecessors-in-interest of the petitioner.
Present: Sh. Bahadur Singh Advocate, for the petitioner.
This is an application filed by Pritam Singh son of Sh.Dhian Singh r/o Royal Majri, Tehsil and District Ropar for the allotment of land in lieu of the land abandoned in village Rajadewali, Tehsil Pasroor District Sialkot (Pakistan) by Smt. Premi wd/o Gandu and Smt. Isher Kaur wd/o Lachman Singh son of Gandu, the maternal-grand mother and maternal aunt (Nanni & Mammi) of the petitioner. They were holding the 1/6th share in the total land measuring 300 kanals, as per Jamabandi received from Pakistan. The petitioner has mentioned that in India, Smt. Premi was allotted 1 S.A. 3½ unit and Smt. Isher Kaur was allotted 1 SA- 2¾ unit in village Katehar (H.B.No.468) Tehsil and Distt. Hoshiarpur and possession of the allotted land was taken, but due to some reasons possession of land could not be maintained by the petitioner’s predecessors-in-interest. The petitioner was recruited in the Army in 1969. When he was relieved from Army the villagers told the petitioner about the land allotment in Hoshiarpur District. Therefore the petitioner has requested to make allotment of land if the land in Hoshiarpur District had been cancelled.
In order to scrutinizes the alleged claim of the applicant Counsel for the petitioner was directed on 4.9.2000. 4.12.2000 and 19.3.2000 to produce all the relevant documents regarding allotment in Hoshiarpur District and last chance for producing the same was given for today.
Today (16.4.2001) counsel for the petitioner is present but he has shown his inability to produce the requisite documents and he has also intimated that he has issued letters to petitioner on 31.7.2001, 4.9.2000, 20.12.2000 and a registered letter on 19.3.2000 for bringing the requisite documents, but he has not contacted him in this regard inspite of issuing the above letters.
For want of all the relevant documents especially about the claim of the petitioner that he is the only heir of Isher Kaur & Smt. Premi no positive order can be passed. Petitioner has not produced any document from which it can be categorically concluded that when & where Lachman Singh & his widow Ishar Kaur died. No evidence has been produced on file that both the above persons had no issue. Any claim filed on such a belated stage is required to be checked up by going into all the aspects. For want of relevant documents, no positive order can be passed.
As discussed above, in spite of the Advocate’s efforts, the petitioner has not tried to contact his counsel and Petitioner’s Advocate has finally shown his inability to produce all the relevant documents. So it can be safely concluded that petitioners seems to have not shown seriousness to prove his case.
Keeping in view the above position, the petition is dismissed.
Announced in open court.
Managing Officer (HQ)
Deptt. of Rehabilitation,