Dulat, J. - (1.) This is an appeal under clause 10 of the Letters Patent against the judgment of Gurnam Singh J., dismissing the appellant's petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) The appellant owned some land and some houses and other buildings in a village in Pakistan. On migration to India, he was allotted more than 4 standard acres of land. After, however, the Displaced Persons (Claims) Act, 1950, was enacted, he put in a separate claim for the village houses. The Act in question was designed primarily for the verification of claims concerning urban property, and Section 2 of that Act said - "In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,- (a) 'claim' means the assertion of a right to the ownership of, or to any interest in, - (i) any immovable property in West Pakistan which is situate within an urban area or, (ii) such class of property in any part of West Pakistan other than in any urban area as may be notified by the Central overnment in this behalf in this Official Gazette; X X X X X X X X X X X" A notification in the form of a rule was issued by the Central Government under the Act, describing the properties in respect of which a claim could be made. This was in the following words: "(1) Any immovable property situated within an urban area in West Pakistan; (2) any immovable property in West Pakistan which forms part of the assets of an industrial undertaking and is situated in any area other than an urban area; (3) any other immovable property in West Pakistan comprising of a building situated in any area other than an urban area: Provided that where a claimant has been allotted any agricultural land in India and that - (a) where the agricultural land so allotted exceeds four acres, the value of the building in respect of which the claim is made shall not according to the present estimated cost of construction, be less than Rs. 20,000/-; X X X X X". The remaining part of the notification is not relevant except perhaps the explanation which was in these words - "Explanation 1. In this rule, the expression 'building' includes:- (a) any structure in the immediate vicinity of a building without which the building cannot be conveniently occupied or enjoyed; (b) any garden, ground, enclosure and outhouses, appurtenant to such building".
(3.) The claims Officer found that none of the houses or buildings, regarding which the claim was made, was individually worth Rs. 20,000/-or more, and he therefore held that the claim was within the meaning of the notification inadmissible. It was against this order that the appellant brought a writ petition to this Court which Gurnam Singh J. dismissed following a Division Bench decision of this Court.;