Allowed

Makhan Ram and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Jul 2013CWP/12055/1990

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An oral order allowing a Writ Petition seeking allotment of balance agricultural land under a scheme for Vimukat Jatis. The court directed that the petitioners' possession not be disturbed and ordered the State and Society to transfer remaining land and complete title within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents not to disturb petitioners' possession; directive to allot balance land and complete title transfer within 12 weeks.

Makhan Ram and Ors. Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.12055 of 1990 (O&M) Date of decision:11.07.2013

¶3

Makhan Ram son of Shri Rulia Ram, resident of Village Talwandi Kalan, Post Office Ladowal, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, and another.

¶4

....Petitioners.

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Punjab, through the Secretary to the Government of Punjab, Department of Harijan Welfare, Civil Secretariat, Chandigarh, and others.

¶7

....Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

¶9

Present: Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate, and Mr. Tarun Jaitly, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶10

Mr. Ranbir Singh Pathania, DAG, Punjab.

¶11

Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No.

¶12

To be referred to the reporters or not ? No.

¶13

Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ?No.

¶14

¶15

K.Kannan, J. (Oral)

¶16

The petitioners seek for a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to allot 10 killas of land in the light of a scheme announced by the then Chief Minister for providing for sale of properties to the members of Scheduled Castes on certain conditions. A Society called, Talwandi Kalan Agricultural Service Society, had been

¶17

Civil Writ Petition No.12055 of 1990 (O&M) - 2 -

¶18

established and the scheme prepared by the Government of India for the welfare of the Vimukat Jatis for assigning lands to them. The Government had at some point of time purported to have allotted 300 acres of land and identified 27 persons as eligible. There had been however cancellation of the allotments made to the members of the Society that resulted in a writ petition in CWP No.2744 of 1967 before this Court at the instance of the Society. This Court by its judgment set aside the cancellation of the allotment originally made and directed that the scheme originally framed must be given full effect to.

¶19

The judgment details the classes of persons, who are eligible for allotment if they are members of the Society. They are reproduced as under:-

¶20

“1. He should be a member of the Vimukat Jaties.

¶21

He should be a member of the Cooperative Society.

¶22

He should be a resident of Village Talwandi Kalan, and

¶23

He should be already in the cultivating possession of the area to be allotted.”

¶24

The petitioners' plea was that the 1^st petitioner himself

¶25

was a member of the Society and he had been in possession of 7 ½ acres of land out of the property which had been allotted to the

¶26

Civil Writ Petition No.12055 of 1990 (O&M) - 3 -

¶27

Society. The 2^nd petitioner is the son of the 1^st petitioner. In the manner in which the petition is drafted, it is seen that he is canvassing for the cause of the 1^st petitioner with consequent benefits to himself. The 1^st petitioner's entitlement to the remaining and for legitimatizing his possession through a proper transfer deed in accordance with law came under a cloud. Yet another person Jit Ram by name staked the claim in relation to some properties that had been set apart under this scheme. He had issue with the Government which was not making the allotment in his name on the pretext that Jit Ram had actually vacated the village and he was not cultivating the property. He appears to have filed a suit for allotment of land and the cancellation of allotment that had been made to him. A decree has been passed against the Government for consideration of his claim to certain properties. The civil court decree stood confirmed and the trial by the Government was stayed.

¶28

The petitioners have filed a writ petition making reference to specific khasra numbers as properties in his peaceful possession. They have also impleaded 3^rd respondent in order to secure an adjudication in his presence so that the petitioners' own entitlement and allotment are not in any way obstructed by a decree which the 3^rd defendant has obtained. The 3^rd defendant has been served, but there had been no appearance on his behalf and, therefore, I had appointed Amicus Curiae to assist me for projecting

¶29

Civil Writ Petition No.12055 of 1990 (O&M) - 4 -

¶30

the case of the 3^rd respondent. In fact, I could not secure the assistance of the counsel subsequently and I had directed at the previous hearing that the State shall elicit information about the availability of land for allotment to the petitioners. The State counsel also has no specific instructions, but I am prepared to take the averment contained in the petition itself as proof of the possession of the petitioner since the 3^rd respondent has not countered the petitioners' plea nor indeed the State has taken objection to the petitioners' contention regarding the possession of the properties. In the manner in which the scheme had been framed, each one of the persons being members of the Society was entitled to 10 acres of land. The State had contended that it had actually transferred 277 acres to the Society (actually it fell short of 300 acres) that approximates to about 10 acres for each one, considering that there were 30 members. The petitioners' entitlement to the property set out in the petition is confirmed as persons in possession of the property and the extent that falls short of 10 acres will be transferred by the Society in accordance with law to the 1^st petitioner. If there is any action of the State that would require to be performed to better the title of the 1^st petitioner, the same shall also be done and any plea by the petitioner for such course shall be attended with alacrity by the official concerned. The writ petition is allowed and the 1^st petitioner or his entitlement is entitled to a

¶31

Civil Writ Petition No.12055 of 1990 (O&M) - 5 -

¶32

direction as prayed for, namely, that the petitioners' possession shall not be disturbed by respondents 1 and 2 by any allotment to any other person. The 1^st petitioner or his successor is at liberty to apply to the Society for allotment of the balance, in an extent of property which is available and secure the assistance of the State in the manner, referred to above, for completion of title. If the petitioners make a plea to the Society, the same shall be considered and a transfer in accordance with law shall be made within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶33

The writ petition is ordered as above.

¶34

(K.KANNAN) JUDGE 11.07.2013 sanjeev

Makhan Ram and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Makhan Ram and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagmohan Bakshi Vs Virender Kumar

(O&M) Garrison Engg. West. Ferozepur Vs M/S Shastri Constructions Co.

Kishni and Anr. Vs Vivek Nirmohi and Ors.

Harbans Lal Joshi Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Bhagwan Pal Singh Vs Ramesh Pal Singh and Anr.

Raj Singh and Another Vs Rup Ram