- (1.)On April 1, 1950, the Deputy Custodian, Jaipur, made an order in proceedings instituted under S. 19 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Ordinance declaring the appellant Dr, Mohammad Saeed a medical practitioner of Jaipur to be an intending evacuee. By the same order a notice was directed to be issue to the respondent (appellant ) to show cause why he should not be declared to be an evacuee under S. 2(d)(i) and S. 2(d)(iii) of the Ordinance. When thereafter the Administration of Evacuee Property Act. 1950 (Act XXXI of 1950). came into force another notice was issued on the appellant under S.22(b) of the Act to show cause why his property should not be declared evacuee property on the ground that he had transferred a substantial portion of his assets to Pakistan. On November 16, 1951, the Deputy Custodian, Jaipur held Dr.Mohammad Saeed to be an evacuee under S.2(d) (iii) of the Administration of Evacuee Property Ordinance, 1949. He also held Dr. Mohammad Saeed's property to be evacuee property under S.7 of the Ordinance and also under S. 22(b) of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950.
(2.)On appeal the District Judge, Jaipur, set aside this declaration of the appellant as an evacuee under S. 2(d) (iii) of the Ordinance and remanded the case for a fresh decision in the light of the observations made by him. As regards the order under S. 22(b) the learned District Judge agreed with the Deputy Custodian that Dr. Mohammed Saeed had transferred a substantial portion of his assets to Pakistan between November 1947 and September 1948. Being of opinion however that not only this act of transfer which took place before the 18th day of October, 1949, but other circumstances including the appellant's conduct after October 18, 1949, have to be taken into consideration before action under S. 22 (b) can be taken, he found that it was difficult to say that the appellant had been making preparations for his migration to Pakistan. Accordingly he set aside the order made by the Deputy Custodian under S. 22(b). The Custodian of Evacuee Property, Rajasthan, moved the Custodian-General of Evacuee Property for revision of this order. The Deputy Custodian-General of Evacuee Property who heard this petition in revision was unable to agree with the District Judge's findings on the question as regards the order under S. 22(b) and accordingly made a reference under S. 27(2) of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950, to the High Court of Rajasthan. The High Court rejected the contention raised on behalf of this appellant that the circumstances as to the transfer of a substantial portion of his assets should relate to an act done by any person, after, he was declared as an intending evacuee. It further held that the fact that Dr. Mohammad Saeed had during the period from August 14, 1947, to October 18, 1949, transferred a substantial portion of his assets in India to Pakistan constituted under the law a preparation for his migration to Pakistan and that this justified a declaration by the Custodian of his property situated in Rajasthan in which Dr. Mohammad Saeed has a right or interest, to be evacuee property. Accordingly, the High Court set aside the decision of the District Judge in respect of Deputy Custodian-General's orders under S. 22(b) and directed the Custodian-General or the Deputy Custodian-General, if authorised to deal with it, to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the decision of the High Court. In accordance with this direction the Deputy Custodian-General on August 10, 1957, held that the property of the petitioner was rightly declared to be evacuee property under S.22(b) by the Deputy Custodian. The appeal has been filed against this decision by special leave granted by this Court.
(3.)After the appeal was heard in part on January 23, 1961, the hearing was adjourned to enable the appellant to make a writ petition. A petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution was then filed on February 14, 1961, praying for a writ of certiorari and/or mandamus or direction to quash the order made under S.22(b). the appeal and the petition have come up for hearing together.