ARJAN SINGH Vs. CUSTODIAN GENERAL OF EVACUEE PROPERTY NEW DELHI AND
LAWS(P&H)-1957-2-7
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on February 25,1957

ARJAN SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
CUSTODIAN GENERAL OF EVACUEE PROPERTY, NEW DELHI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent raises the question whether the learned Single Judge was justified in setting aside an order passed by the deputy Custodian-General.
(2.) ARJAN Singh appellant was allotted 34 standard acres 8 1/2 units of land in village Kirtowal and Kehr Singh respondent was allotted 33 standard acres 12 1/4 units in the same village. On the 6th November 1951 the Authorised Deputy custodian directed that the appellant who was a bigger of the two allottees should be ousted from the village and the order of the Authorised Deputy Custodian was upheld by the Additional Custodian notwithstanding the fact that during the pendency of the appeal the respondent was allotted an additional 1 standard acre 1 1/2 units and had thus become the bigger of the two allottees. The appellant sought the intervention of the Deputy Custodian-General under section 27 of the administration of Evacuee Property Act. The latter allowed the petition, set aside the order of the Additional Custodian and directed that the respondent who was the bigger of the two allottees should be ousted from the village. The respondent presented a petition under Article 227 and secured a reversal of the order of the deputy Custodian-General. The concluding portion of the order of the learned single Judge was in the following terms:- "in the matter of ousting it must be that the biggest allottee is ousted and it cannot be said "that merely because one man has allotments in several villages he should be taken to be the biggest allottee because if that was so he would be ousted from every village. It would be an absurd interpretation to be put on the rupee of allotment. Merely because after Arjan Singh was ousted and some more land was allotted to Kehr Singh is no ground for holding that he becomes the biggest allottee. In my opinion the Deputy Custodian General has misdirected himself and I would therefore allow this petition and quash the order of the Deputy Custodian General".
(3.) THE instruction which requires the biggest allottee to be ousted appears in paragraph 9 at page 84 of the Resettlement Manual and runs as follows: "if in a village the area available was not sufficient to meet the claims of all the temporary allottees, then in the descending order of the size of holdings those with the largest holdings would be moved from that village until the point was reached at which the area available balanced the demand. ";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.