R K Suneja and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Nov 2008CWP/9517/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the repeal of the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, 1954, did not extinguish pending verified claims. Following a Ministry of Home Affairs instruction, the court deemed the petitioners' controversy revived and directed the State to transmit files without dismissing the writ petition.

What the court decided

AI extract

R K Suneja and Anr. Vs State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2008)

¶1

CWP No.9517 of 2008

¶2

1

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH.

¶4

CWP No. 9517 of 2008 Date of decision: 10.11.2008

¶5

R.K.Suneja and another.

¶6

....Petitioners.

¶7

vs.

¶8

State of Haryana and others.

¶9

..Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.S.KHEHAR. HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR.

¶11

Present: Mr.Harkesh Manuja,Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr.H.S.Hooda, Senior Advocate, and Advocate General,Haryana. Mr.Surinder K.Bishnoi, DAG Haryahna, with him.

¶13

J.S.KHEHAR,J. (Oral)

¶14

In the joint written statement filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4, the State Government has, inter alia, adopted the following stance:-

¶15

“ That the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation Act), 1954, which was a Central Act consisting the authorities for allotment of land has since been repealed by Displaced Persons Claims and Other Laws Repeal Act, 2005. Section 2 of the Repeal Act 2005 says “ the enactment specify in the schedule is hereby repealed” which includes the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation)Act, 1954. The Repeal has not provided any Saving Clause and as such all proceedings have come to an end and can not continue after said Repeal. The resultant effect is that a Law providing compensation and grants to displaced persons never existed after Repealment of the Act, 1954. A copy of the notification dated 6.9.2005 is annexed herewith as Annexure R/1. The State Government of Haryana considered the matter and

¶16

CWP No.9517 of 2008

¶17

2

¶18

enacted the new Act namely “the Haryana Evacuee Properties (Management and Disposal) Act, 2008.....”.

¶19

The Advocate General,Haryana, has also handed over to us,

¶20

during the course of hearing of the instant writ petition, a communication dated 22.9.2008, received by the Chief Secretary,Punjab, from the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. It is submitted by the Advocate General, that identical communications were also despatched by the Government of India to the Chief Secretary for the State of Haryana. A copy of the communication dated 22.9.2008, is taken on record and marked as Annexure-A. A perusal of the instructions dated 22.9.2008 (Annexure-A) reveals, that in order to remove any ambiguity which may have been created as a consequence of the promulgation of the Displaced Persons Claims and Other Laws Repeal Act,2005, on 6.9.2005 (whereby the Displaced Persons (Claims)Act, 1950, the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950, the Evacuee Interest (Separation)Act, 1951, the Displaced Persons (Claims) Supplementary Act, 1954 and the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954, were repealed) was taken as having the effect of rendering nugatory all pending issues under the repealed Acts with effect from 6.9.2005. On a re-determination of the issue, after taking into consideration various orders which have earlier been issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, it was considered appropriate to remove any ambiguity which may have been created as a consequence of the notification of the Displaced Persons Claims and Other Laws Repealed Act, 2005. Accordingly, the instruction dated 22.9.2008 (Annexure-A) was issued. Relevant extract of the aforesaid instruction is being reproduced

CWP No.9517 of 2008

3

hereunder:-

“...in order to remove ambiguity and doubts which appear to have been created, it is clarified that the enactment of the displaced persons claims and other Laws repeal Act 2005 would not affect disposal of the following categories of cases and the State Government/UTs may, therefore, take action as appropriate, to settle them under the relevant State Laws or the General Clauses Act:-

¶25

3.1 Unsatisfied verified claims filed under the Displaced Persons (Claims) Act, 1950, in which right has accrued or has been acquired and which were pending as on 6.9.2005, the date on which the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation)Act, 1954 and other related Acts were repealed. 3.2. Cases in which directions have been issued by various Courts for settlement of claims filed, confirming that an acquired or accrued right exists in favour of the claimant, under Displaced Persons (Claims)Act, 1950.

¶26

3.3. Verified claims in which full compensation has not been given so far.

¶27

3.4. Appeals and revision/review petitions filed against orders passed by the authorities prescribed under the repealed Acts which are not yet to be disposed off”.

¶28

Having identified the revival of the specified categories of matters the policy instructions dated 22.9.2008 clarified that unsatisfied verified claims, in connection with which proceedings are pending as on 6.9.2005 would not be affected by the provisions of the repealed Acts, referred to hereinabove.

¶29

The learned Advocate General, Haryana, acknowledges, that all matters falling strictly within the purview of the Haryana Evacuee Properties (Management and Disposal)Act, 2008, as well as, the policy instructions dated 22.9.2008, limited to the four categories of cases depicted therein, would still survive in spite of the repealed Acts.

¶30

CWP No.9517 of 2008

¶31

4

¶32

In view of the submission made by the learned Advocate General, Haryana, the controversy raised by the petitioners herein, will be deemed to have been revived. Accordingly, a direction is hereby issued requiring respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to ensure transmission of the relevant files to the concerned authority within one month from today. Parties are directed to appear before the authority where the issue under consideration was pending on 22.12.2008.

¶33

With the revival of the pending proceedings, the instant writ petition has been rendered infructuous and is disposed of accordingly.

¶34

( J.S.Khehar) Judge (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge

¶35

November 10, 2008 rk

R K Suneja and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

R K Suneja and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohinder Pal Vs State of Pb. & Ors.

Geja Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Manjit Singh and Ors. Vs Financial Commissioner and Ors.

Phool Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Dalip Singh Vs Director Rural Development

M/S Baba Paramjeet Singh and Co. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.