Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 – ss.16, 17 and 20 – Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Rules, 1955 – r. 51 – Father of appellant was resident of Sindh in the present day Pakistan and after partition, came to settle in Hyderabad – Father of appellant asserted that he was owner of 83.11 acres of land in Sindh and the same was verified by the settlement claim officer – On basis of that order, appellant applied for land in lieu of 83.11 acres of land left by him – Appellant was allotted 40.4 standard acres of land – The father of appellant did not raise any claim for allotment of additional land till his death – Thereafter, appellant claimed allotment of 43.7 standard acres against balance of verified claim – The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration (CCLA) allotted the land measuring 19.26 standard acres – The questions which were required to be examined were as to whether the Central Government having transferred land to the State Government, could make allotment to the displaced persons after May 24, 1980 – And, whether CCLA, as a delegate of the Central Government, could allot land though he exercises the appellate powers, the power of allotment having been vested with the Managing Officer as per s. 17 of the Act – Held: The Circular dated May 23, 1980 relates to administration, management and disposal of compensation which is in terms of s. 16 of the Act – S. 16(2)(b) of the Act empowers the Central Government to constitute such authority or Corporation for the purposes of sub-section (1) i.e. custody, management and disposal of compensation pool – The Central Government is competent to constitute any authority or Corporation for the same purpose – Therefore, the transfer of land forming part of compensation pool to the State Government has legislative sanction in terms of s. 16(2)(b) of the Act – In the instant case, the allotment was made by the CCLA as a delegatee of the Central Government – The Settlement Commissioner had no power to make allotment of land falling in the compensation pool either before May 23, 1980 or thereafter – Insofar as the power of CCLA in terms of the scheme of the Act is concerned, the allotment of all evacuee land is governed by the Act, therefore, the officers competent to make allotment are the Managing Officers, whereas power of appeal and revision are to be exercised by the Settlement Commissioner or the Chief Settlement Commissioner – The CCLA in terms of the scheme of the Act has no power to make allotment of land as he exercises the appellate or revisional jurisdiction as a delegate of the Central Government – The power of allotment is vested with Managing Officer only in terms of s. 17 of the Act. Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.The first and the foremost question which requires to be examined is as to whether the Central Government having transferred land to the State Government, could make allotment to the displaced persons after May 24, 1980. Another question which arises is whether CCLA, as a delegatee of the Central Government, could allot land though he exercises the appellate powers, the power of allotment having been vested with the Managing Officer as per Section 17 of the Act. [Para 22] [1074G-H]
2. In the State of Andhra Pradesh, initially a letter was communicated on December 9, 1964 in response to the communication from the Government of India regarding winding up of certain organization of the Central Government and transfer of land to the State. However, on May 24, 1980, the transfer of the land in compensation pool to the State Government was completed when the circular contemplating administration, management and disposal of remaining undisposed evacuee property was issued. The circular provides that the Central Government is to be given 15% of realised value of the properties after sale and the balance sale amount was permitted to be retained by the State Government. The transfer of land to the State Government is complete w.e.f. June 1, 1980 subject to the conditions specified in the Circular dated May 23, 1980 such as payment of 15% of realised value to the Central Government. Even if, such value is not paid by the State Government, it is between the State Government and the Central Government and not for any third party to make a grievance or dispute the same. [Para 23] [1075-A-C]
3. All evacuee property in terms of notification issued by the Central Government from time to time in terms of Section 12 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 forms part of compensation pool under Section 14 of the Act. Section 16 of the Act empowers the Central Government to take such measures as is considered necessary or expedient for the custody, management and disposal of compensation pool. The Circular dated May 23, 1980 relates to administration, management and disposal of compensation which is in terms of Section 16 of the Act. Section 16(2)(b) of the Act empowers the Central Government to constitute such authority or corporation for the purposes of sub-section (1) i.e. custody, management and disposal of compensation pool. The Central Government is competent to constitute any authority or corporation for the same purpose. Therefore, the transfer of land forming part of compensation pool to the State Government has legislative sanction in terms of Section 16(2)(b) of the Act. [Para 24] [1075-D-F]
4. The argument raised by the appellant that the Central Government has notified the authorities to give effect to the provisions of the Act, therefore, the Central Government has retained control and administration of the evacuee property, is misconceived. The land forming part of the compensation pool was transferred to the State Government and the officers of the State Government were entrusted with the functions of Managing Officer or Settlement Commissioner, as the case may be. The allotment of all evacuee land is governed by the Act, therefore, the officers competent to make allotment are the Managing Officers, whereas power of appeal and revision are to be exercised by the Settlement Commissioner or the Chief Settlement Commissioner. Such notifications facilitate the exercise of powers under the Act by the officers of the State Government in respect of land which stood transferred to the State Government. The CCLA in terms of the scheme of the Act has no power to make allotment of land as he exercises the appellate or revisional jurisdiction as a delegate of the Central Government. The power of allotment is vested with the Managing Officer only in terms of Section 17 of the Act. [Para 28] [1078-D-G]
5. The allotment was made by the CCLA as a delegatee of the Central Government. The Settlement Commissioner had no power to make allotment of land falling in compensation pool either before May 23, 1980 or thereafter. Since the land stood transferred to the State Government, the CCLA as a delegatee of the Central Government, could not deal with the land forming part of compensation pool which stood transferred to the State Government. [Para 29] [1078-G-H; 1079-A]
6. On this ground alone, the allotment made in favour of the appellant on February 26, 2003 cannot be sustained in view of the Division Bench judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court in Ram Chander, as approved by this Court in Pala Singh. this Court finds that the Central Government or its delegatee could not allot land after the same was transferred to the State as a part of the package deal. [Para 30] [1079-B]
7. However, this Court is unable to agree with the High Court that transfer of land to the State Government takes such transferred land out of compensation pool. The land transferred to the State Government continues to be part of compensation pool but it is required to be disposed of by the Officers of the State who have been conferred the powers of the Managing Officer or of the Settlement Commissioner for the settlement of the displaced persons alone. It is only after the displaced persons are settled, the State Government may utilize the land for other purposes. [Para 31] [1079-C-D]
Amar Singh & Ors. v. Custodian, Evacuee Property, Punjab & Anr. AIR 1957 SC 599 : [1957] SCR 801 – referred to.
Ram Chander v. The State of Punjab & Ors.
(1968) 2 ILR P&H 651 – approved.
Pala Singh (Deceased) by LRs. v. Union of India & Ors. (1987) Suppl. SCC 201 : [1987] SCR 624 ; Chameli Devi & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
CWP No.14772 of 2000 decided on November 14,
2017 ; Union of India v. International Sindhi Panchayats & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 6079 of 2010 decided on April 28, 2014 – relied on.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.