Shamsher Bahadur, J. - (1.) What is sought to be challenged in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is the order of the Settlement Commissioner cancelling the claim of Diwan Singh for allotment of rural land under Rule 65 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules, on the ground that he had already been allotted agricultural land as compensation.
(2.) As stated in the petition, the Petitioner Diwan Singh is a displaced person and got a verified claim of Rs. 7,036 in lieu of the rural properties left by him in Pakistan. He was granted compensation in lieu of this claim which was for rural properties abandoned in Pakistan. This claim Was admitted in the first instance but came to be cancelled by the Settlement Commissioner on 24th of January, 1957, for the reason that the Petitioner was already an allotted of a agricultural land and the assessed value of his rural claim was below the limit laid down in rural 65. Sub -rule (2) of Rule 65 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules is to this effect: Any person to whom four acres or less of agricultural land have been allotted, shall not be entitled to receive compensation separately in respect of his verified claim for any rural building the assessed value of which is less than Rs. 10,000.
(3.) It is plain that if the Petitioner had been allotted land of four acres or less the compensation for rural properties of less than Rs. 10,000 would be inadmissible. The case of the Petitioner, however, is that his allotment had been cancelled as far back as 28th of August, 1951. Exhibit R. 2 which is filed by the Respondent, shows that this allotment was cancelled for the reason that the allotted had not taken possession of the land. There is also an order of the Patwari of 30th of December, 1961 (Annexure G) to this effect: It is submitted that Diwan Singh, Hakam Singh, Ganda Singh; Sardari Lal, sons of S. Dewa Singh are stated, to be the allottees of 3/4th of a unit of land comprised in Khasra Nos. 119/0 -9 according to the allotment order No. 11 of Mauza Jansoi, Hadbast No. 42. But as the allotters did not take possession, the said allotment has been cancelled and the land has been re -allotted to some other person.;