The Chief Settlement Commissioner has no power to review the order of the Chief Claims Commissioner under Section 5(1)(b) of the Displaced Persons (Claims) Supplementary Act, 1954, as the Chief Claims Commissioner is not subordinate to the Chief Settlement Commissioner.

Headnote:
DISPLACED PERSONS (CLAIMS) SUPPLEMENTARY ACT, 1954 - SECTION 5(1)(B) - REVIEW OF CLAIMS - JURISDICTION - The Chief Settlement Commissioner has no power to review the order of the Chief Claims Commissioner under Section 5(1)(b) of the Displaced Persons (Claims) Supplementary Act, 1954, as the Chief Claims Commissioner is not subordinate to the Chief Settlement Commissioner.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a displaced person from Pakistan, had his claim for compensation for property left behind in Pakistan verified and valued at Rs. 4,710 by the Claims Commissioner and confirmed by the Chief Claims Commissioner. However, the third respondent, the Additional Settlement Commissioner with delegated powers of the Chief Settlement Commissioner, reopened the claim and reduced it to Rs. 500.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the third respondent had no jurisdiction to review the order of the Chief Claims Commissioner as the Chief Claims Commissioner was the highest authority under the Displaced Persons (Claims) Act, 1950, and the Chief Settlement Commissioner had no power to review the orders of the Chief Claims Commissioner under Section 5(1)(b) of the Displaced Persons (Claims) Supplementary Act, 1954.
Issues: Whether the third respondent had jurisdiction to review the order of the Chief Claims Commissioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Chief Settlement Commissioner had no power to review the order of the Chief Claims Commissioner under Section 5(1)(b) of the Displaced Persons (Claims) Supplementary Act, 1954, as the Chief Claims Commissioner was not subordinate to the Chief Settlement Commissioner. The court also held that the power to review a prior order is principally the power vested in an officer to review an order previously made by himself and not by anybody else.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition, quashed the order of the third respondent, and restored the orders of the Claims Commissioner and the Chief Claims Commissioner.

JUDGMENT - Tambe, Ag.C.J.

1. Civil Application No. 2904 of 1965 was only an application for sending for the record. Certified copies of the relevant record have been produced and shown to the petitioner. This application no more survives.

(2) Special Civil Application NO. 588 of 1964 is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. By this petition the petitioner seeks to get quashed the order dated 31st October 1962 made by respondent No. 3 Mr. Ajwani, the Additional Settlement Commissioner with delegated powers of the Chief Settlement Commissioner. By this order the third respondent has reopened the verified claim of the petitioner and has in effect reduced it from Rs. 4, 710 to Rs. 500. The facts in brief are these. The petitioner originally belonged to Nawabshah, a place in Sind. That territory now is part of West Pakistan. The petitioner along with his brothers migrated to India leaving behind certain plots of land. According to the petitioner, he had a certain share in the immoveable property left by him and his brothers in urban area, that is, property within municipal limits. The petitioner as well as his brothers filed separate claims in respect of the said property before the claims officer and the claims officer by his order dated 13th January 1953 held that the property was in urban area. It was within the municipal limits of Nawabshah. The value of the property was Rs. 18,840 and the share of the petitioner in this property was to the extent of its one-fourth. On these findings the operative order made by him was : "I accordingly verify and value the claimants one-fourth share at Rs. 4,710."

The petitioner was not satisfied with the decision of the Claims Commissioner. Against the said order he preferred a revision before the Chief Claims Commissioner. The Chief Claims Commissioner, however, by his order dated 28th April 1953 dismissed the revision application and affirmed the aforesaid order of the Claims Commissioner. The order made by the Chief Claims Commissioner is of date 28th April 1953. The resulting position then was that the highest authority under the Displaced Persons (Claims) Act (Act XLIV of 1950) had held that the petitioner along with his brothers had left behind in West Pakistan immoveable property situate within municipal limits. The value of that property was over Rs. 18,000 and the value of the petitioners one-fourth share therein was to the extent of Rs. 4710. The matters rested there for nearly nine years. It is not known how, but it appears that some time in the year 1962 the third respondent had issued notice to the petitioner as well as his brothers to show cause why action proposed by him should not be taken against them. He fixed the hearing at Bombay. The petitioner appeared at the hearing fixed by the third respondent in Bombay on 24th September 1962. Before the third respondent the petitioner again reiterated his claim that his property in Nawabshah within the urban area. The third respondent by his order of 31st October 1962 held that on consideration of the materials on record in his opinion there was no reliable documentary evidence to prove that the property was within urban limits. The record received from Pakistan showed that the property was not within limits and on these grounds he held that the property was situate wholly in the rural area and has valued it as an agricultural property. The material part of his order runs in the following terms:

"..........the total area in the name of Damomal in the official record received from Pakistan comes to 12 acres 37 gunthas which is under Zamindari Sharat,. so that 12 1/2 per cent would be deduced and the net area would comes to 11 acres 12 1/2 gunthas which at 12 annas less 1 anna for rice restriction would stand valued at 7 standard acres 15 1/2 annas. Atomizing Wadhumal and Pritbai between themselves would take 3/5 share i.e., 4 standard acres 12 1/2 annas. Damomal would take 1/5 share i.e., 1 standard acre 9 1/2th annas

Click Here to Read the rest of this document