Judgment

A. K. SARKAR, J. : This appeal by special leave granted by this Court under Art. 136 of the Constitution is from an order passed on 20-4-1956, by the Chief Settlement Commissioner appointed under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954. It is principally concerned with that Act.

2. The appellants are a firm of which the partners are displaced persons within the meaning of the Act. There are certain salt pans in Wadala, Bombay, known as Salamati Salt Factory. The salt pans were evacuee property and formed part of the compensation pool constituted under the Act. On 7-11-1950, a lease of the salt pans was granted to the appellants for a period of three years. This lease was renewed from time to time, and on 2-12-1955,it was renewed for a period ending on 13-2-1956. On 23-12-1955, the Regional Settlement Commissioner, an officer appointed under the Act, who is respondent No. 3 in this appeal, advertised that the salt pans should be sold by public auction on 6-1-1956. The appellants moved the High Court at Bombay under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the proposed sale on the ground that the value of the property did not exceed. Rs. 50,000 and consequently it could not, under the provisions of the Act, be sold without first offering it to the appellants in lieu of compensation payable to them under the Act. The High Court stayed the sale pending the hearing of the application. On 2-2-1956, the lease to the appellants was renewed for the last time for a further period ending on 15-4-1956. Thereafter, the application under Art. 226 of the Constitution came up for hearing and was dismissed. The appellants filed an appeal in the same Court from the order of dismissal and again applied for a stay of the sale. The Court however, refused to stay the sale further and only ordered that the sale was not to be confirmed for a week and expedited the hearing of the appeal. On 31-3-1956, the property was put up to auction and Parvatibai Wadhumal and Kakanbai Tulsimal, respondents Nos. 4 and 5 who offered a bid of Rs. 4,40,000 were declared the highest bidder. At the sale the appellants themselves had bid up to Rs. 4,39,000. Thereafter on 6-4-1956 the appellants withdrew the appeal pending in the High Court at Bombay. They state that they did so as it involved disputed or controversial questions of fact as to the value of the property which would not have been decided by the Court in an application under Art. 226. The sale had not till then been confirmed.

3. On 11-4-1956, the appellants made an application to the Chief Settlement Commissioner who is respondent No. 1 in this appeal, for the following orders :

(a) that the confirmation of the sale in pursuance of the auction held on 31-3-1956, be stayed;

(b) that they be given an opportunity to substantiate their case on the merits;

(c) that they be not evicted till the disposal of their case;

(d) that the lease granted to them be extended till end of the working season.

The grounds on which this application was made were two, namely,

(1) Under S.29 of the Act, the appellants who were in lawful possession of the property had statutory immunity from eviction for a period of two years.

(2) That the property was not liable to be sold but should be allotted to the appellants at its value did not exceed Rs. 50,000.

The Chief Settlement Commissioner granted a stay of the confirmation of the sale pending the hearing of the application. On 15-4-1956, the lease expired and thereafter on 20-4-1956, the Chief Settlement Commissioner made an order dismissing the application but giving the appellants 14 days time to remove the salt lying in the pans. The order also stated that the sale to respondents Nos. 4 and 5 was confirmed and possession of the salt pans should be given to them forthwith. On 25-4-1956, the Managing Officer of Evacuee Property, also an officer appointed under the Act, and respondent No. 2 in this appeal, wrote to the appellants that the posse