Policy and Legal

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

All the Commissioners of Division.
All the Deputy Commissioners.
All the Sub Divisional Magistrate.
All the District Revenue Officers.
All the Tehsildars in the State.
Director Land Record, Punjab, Kapurthala Road, Jalandhar

Memo No:2/66/70-PL-II/6729

Chandigarh, dated the:6-11-06

Subject: THE DISPLACED PERSONS CLAIMS AND OTHER LAWS REPEAL

ACT 2005- REGARDING.

Reference: This office memo No.2/66/70-PL-II/4538 dated 1.12.2005.

*****

Kindly refer to this department memo under reference vide which a copy of Notification issued by Ministry of Law & Justice, Legislative Department, New Delhi, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary Part-II, Section I-No.44 dated 6.9.2005 vide which the copy of notification of Displaced Persons Claims and other Laws Repeal Act 2005 (No.38 of 2005) was sent to you for taking immediate necessary action. Vide this Notification the following enactments have been repealed:-

S.No.	Name of the Act	Year	Act No.
1.	The Administration of Evacuee Property Act.	1950	31
2.	The Displaced Persons (Claims Act)	1950	44
3.	The Evacuee Interest (Separation ) Act	1951	64
4.	The Displaced Persons (Claims) Supplementary Act	1954	12
5.	The Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act.	1954	44

1. The question has been raised about the matters which were pending at the time of notification of the Repeal Act i.e. on 6.9.2005. On this question the Govt. of India, Ministry of Home Affairs have clarified the Position vide No.MHA/RD/SW/CC/99 dated 19-10-2005. The relevant part is reproduced as follow :-

“MHA seeks to be advised whether after the coming into force of the Displaced Persons claims and Other Laws Repeal Act 2005, all/some of the notified authorities under Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 will be deemed to be discontinued or not.”

2. The Displaced Persons (Claims) Act,1950, the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950, the Evacuee interest (Separation) Act, 1951, the Displaced Persons (Claims) Supplementary Act. 1954 and the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 were enacted, inter-alia to make provisions for the registration and verification of claims of displaced persons in respect of immovable property in Pakistan, the administration of evacuee, providing for the separation of the interests of evacuees from those of other persons in property in which other persons are also interested, the payment of compensation and rehabilitation grant to displaced persons and the disposal of certain proceedings pending under the Displaced Persons (Claims) Act, 1950.

3. It had come to the notice of Central Govt. that a number of persons unconnected with claimants, posing as their legal heirs were presenting fraudulent claims for lands. It was therefore, felt necessary to repeal the aforesaid Acts and to discourage such fraudulent claims and consequently these Acts were repealed by the Displaced Persons Claims and other Laws Repeal Act. 2005. The repealing Act was enacted pursuant to the recommendation of Core Group which recommended the repeal of aforesaid Acts and Rules made thereunder.

4. The question for our consideration therefore is whether the proceedings, which were initiated before the repeal of aforesaid Acts, could continue even after the said repeal. In this context Sec.6(c) of the General Clauses Act (GC Act) would be relevant which reads as under:-

Effect of Repeal- Where this Act, or any Central Act or regulation made after the commencement of this Act, repeals any enactment hitherto made or hereafter to be made, then, unless a different intention appears shall not-

(c) affect any right , privilege, obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under any enactment so repealed; or

5. In Kolhapur Canesugar’s case (AIR 2000 SC 811), the Apex Court has held as under :

The position is well known that at common law, the normal effect of repealing a statute or deleting a provision is to obliterate it from the statute book as completely as it had never been passed, and the statute must be considered as a law that never existed. To this rule, an exception is engrafted by the provisions of section 6(1). If a provision of a statute is unconditionally omitted without a saving clause in favour of pending proceedings, all actions must stop where the omission finds them and if final relief has not been granted before the omission goes into effect, if cannot be granted afterwards. Saving of the nature contained in section 6 or in special acts may modify the position. Thus the operation of repeal or deletion as to the further and the past largely depends on the savings applicable. In a case where a particular provision in a statute is omitted and in its place another provisions dealing with the same contingency is introduced without a saving clause then it can be reasonably inferred that the intention of the legislature is that the pending proceedings shall not continue but a fresh proceeding for the same purpose may be initiated under the new provision.

6. Now coming back to section 6(c) of the GC Act and the effect thereof on the proceedings a reference may be made to decision of Apex Court in MS/Shivananda Case 1980 1 SCC 149 wherein the Apex Court has held as under:-

“The distinction between what is and what is not a right preserved by the provision of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act is often one of great fineness. What is unaffected by the repeal of a statute is a right acquired or accrued under it and not a mere hope or expectation of”, or liberty to apply for acquiring a right.

7. The Apex Court in Bansidhar case 1982, 2 SCC 557 has again held that the ‘right’ must be ‘accrued’ and not merely an inchoate one.

8. Thus under the repealed Acts, there is no ‘accrued’ or ‘acquired’ right in favour of the claimants but is a mere hope or expectation.

9. In view of the above legal position and reading through SOR of said repealing Act, we are of the opinion that the proceedings under the repealed Acts will come to an end and cannot continue after such repeal.”

II. The Govt. of India further issued a clarification vide their No.MHA/RD/SW/99 dated 18-11-2005 as under :

“As observed from the Repealed Act, 2005 there is no saving clause in the Repealing Act which would validate the actions taken before coming into force of the Act. The statutory authorities appointed are required to exercise their powers or take actions as mentioned in the Repealed Act. Hence in view thereof, after the repeal of these acts no action can be taken or any authority exercised under the repealed acts by these notified authorities. In the circumstances the notified authorities shall be deemed to be discontinued.”

In view of this position, the proceedings under the repealed Acts have come to an end and cannot continue after such repeal. And, no further action can be taken under the repealed Acts after 6.9.2005 as all the authorities under those Acts have ceased to exist w.e.f.6.9.2005 the date of notification.

-Sd/-