GOVIND MATHUR, J. - (1.) THIS petition for writ is directed against the order dated 5-10-1991 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Bikaner exercising powers under Section 33 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1954).
(2.) THE factual matrix necessary for adjudication of present writ petition are as follows :- Land measuring 25 bighas situated in chak No. 3 JJ. Tehsil Padampur, District Sriganganager was allotted to the petitioner being a displaced person from Pakistan. While making allotment of land as displaced person Smt. Lalibai wife of petitioner, Tekaram minor son of the petitioner. Kishnoo and Kanti nephew and niece of the petitioner were included in family of the petitioner and a certificate in this regard was issued by the allotting authority on 30-5-1954. A sanad with regard to land allotted was issued in name of the petitioner by concerned rehabilitation officer on 31-3-1976. The respondents Nos. 3 and 4 viz Smt. Banti wife of Daularam and Vishnu son of Asharam being aggrieved by grant of sanad dated 31-3-1976 preferred a petition under Section 24 of the Act of 1954 before the Collector-cum-Chief Settlement Commissioner, Sriganganagar on 17-9-1982. The petition submitted by the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 stood rejected by the Chief Settlement Commissioner vide judgment dated 31-1-1984. Learned Settlement Commissioner was not satisfied with the contention of the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 that they are Kanti and Kishnoo, niece and nephew of the petitioner; who were shown as a member of the petitioner's family while making allotment of land on 30-5-1954. The Settlement Commissioner held that Kanti and Kishnoo, niece and nephew of the petitioner died long back and, therefore, sanad in the name of the petitioner was rightly issued.
(3.) THE respondents Nos. 3 and 4 being aggrieved by the order passed by the Settlement Commissioner dated 31-1-1984 preferred a revision petition under Section 33 of the Act of 1954 before the Secretary to the Government of Rajasthan, Rehabilitation Department, Jaipur. The revision petition preferred by the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 was rejected by the authority competent by judgment dated 10-5-1984. The revisional authority while rejecting the revision petition held as under : "In the said certificate it has further been mentioned that Shri Kala Ram, brother of Jumma Ram had died in Pakistan and his son Kishnu (in whose name the present petitioner has come) died about 25 years back. Kanti also died about a year after the death of Kishnu. Now the present petitioner, taking advantage of the death of Kishnu, wants to agitate the issue in the name of those dead persons. It has nowhere been established by the petitioner that he is the original Kishnu or by the respondent No. 6 that she is the original Kanti, in absence of the same, their claims cannot be entertained now. Even for a moment if it is admitted for the sake of argument that they were alive, then it was their responsibility to have challenged the sanad which they did not do." ;