BEHARI LALA Vs. ALLAH RAKHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is presented by appellants 1 to 19, challenging the correctness and legality of the order passed by a learned single Judge in OWP No. 525 /94 dated 7-9-1995 whereby the learned single Judge after hearing learned counsel on both the sides held, "The question of application of Ag7rarian Reforms Act is a question independent of it and in my opinion the observation impugned was uncalled for and the Tribunal had while passing that direction, acted beyond jurisdiction." Thus the writ petition was disposed of. It is this order which is called in question in this appeal.

(2.) The respondents in the writ petition referred to above had been claiming to be the tenants cultivating a piece of land and deriving certain rights by virtue of the lease made in their favour. However, it is not in dispute that consequent upon the demise of the sole proprietor, the propriety was declared as evacuee property and allotted to the respondents (appellants 1 to 19) by applying the provisions of JandK State Evacuees'(Administration of Property) Act, 2006 (1949 A.D.), hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. It is also not in dispute that against that order of the Custodian the matter was taken up in appeal before the Custodian General who by an order made on 28-5-1979 upheld the finding and it has accordingly assumed the finality. Indeed, it is now brought to our notice that, that order was challenged before the learned single Judge of this Court in (CSA No. 7/1979) and again after exhausting the remedy before this court, the matter was taken before the Supreme Court in SLP(C) No.14392/1991. Before the Supreme Court dealing with the Contempt Petition No. 361/ 1993 holding that there was an inordinate delay in bringing the SLP, the Supreme Court did not considered the delay. Accordingly the SLP came to be dismissed. Thus the entire proceedings came to be culminated in the above order of the Supreme Court.

(3.) It is now brought to our notice that thereafter the order of the Custodian was sought to be executed before the competent executing court. At that time an application was presented seeking the transfer of the proceedings of the execution before the Land Tribunal on the premises that the question of Land Agrarian Reforms arose in the proceedings in as much as the real question sought to be pressed into service was that the land in question is in excess of the ceiling limit imposed under the Agrarian Reforms Act. However, the member of the Special Tribunal has issued a direction in this manner :"All this has been said with a view that the parties who are litigating for the last more than two decades should obey the majesty of law and none of the party should become victim of false and imaginative transgression of law and setting the wheels of justice in motion on frivolous and untenable grounds. Either the fear psychosis or the motivation to perpetuate the wrongful gains have impelled the petitioners herein to bring this litigation in this forum which at this stage should have remained confined to the precincts of the lowest of the hierarchy,"With these observations the application came to be dismissed. Aggrieved by this order of the Tribunal, the matter came up before a learned single Judge of this court in OWP No. 525/ 1994 challenging the correctness and legality of the finding and the conclusion reached by the Tribunal.