Daya Krishan Mahajan, J. - (1.) THERE is no dispute on facts in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The total claim of Karam Singh Petitioner in his individual capacity amounted to Rs. 26,659. His uncle Gurditta Mal had a claim which was verified to the extent of Rs. 16,760 in his individual capacity. Gurditta Mal had made a will in favour of Karam Singh Petitioner. Gurditta Mal died. On his death disputes arose between Karam Singh Petitioner and some other persons as to who was his successor. These disputes were settled by the order of the Settlement Commissioner with delegated powers to the Chief Settlement Commissioner, dated the 8th of August, 1957 (copy Annexure 'C'), whereby the share of Karam Singh Petitioner in Gurditta Mal's claim was fixed at Rs. 11,243 -12 -0. The Department while asses -sing the amount of compensation payable on these verified claims clubbed his individual claim with the claim to which he succeeded by inheritance. This course was objected to by the Petitioner, but the authorities below did not accede to his contention. The Petitioner has now moved this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) THE learned Counsel for the Petitioner draws my attention to Rule 18 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules, 1955. This rule is in these terms - 18. For the purposes of determining the compensation payable to an applicant, the Regional Settlement Commissioner shall, except as otherwise provided in these rules, add up the assessed value of all claims of the applicant in respect of all kinds of properties, other than agricultural land, situated in a rural area, left by him in West Pakistan and the compensation shall be assessed on the total value of all such claims. A bare reading of the rule leaves no manner of doubt that the contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner is correct.
(3.) THE learned Advocate -General, on the other hand, contends that Rule 18 itself states that this rule shall be subject to other rules under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (Act No. 44 of 1954) and the other rule which the learned Advocate -General points out and according to which he justifies the action of the Department is Rule 21. This is in these terms - 21. Where a person holds a number of verified claims in different capacities, the total compensation payable to him shall be determined in accordance with the pro visions of Rules 18, 19, and 20.;