JUDGMENT

1. This appeal involves an irony faced by the person who is migrated to India from Pakistan after the partition. Neither the displaced person [Shri Adumal Morandamal] nor his legal representative Defendant No.3- Bhojraj got the land as per the provisions of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1954"). As on today, after the passage of several years, even this Court is not aware as to whether the said allottee got the land or not. It seems that this situation has arisen probably due to lack of coordination between the Government Authorities and due to insensitivity shown by the concerned person. However, when the Constitutional Court has noticed this situation, the Court cannot shut its eyes and confined itself to the issues raised before it. If required, this Court has to pass necessary orders (within the limits of appellate jurisdiction), so that the displaced persons will get relief. At the same time, this Court has also to see that the interest of other stakeholders is protected.

2. In this appeal, this Court is required to consider the right of tenant/purchaser on one hand and right of an allottee unde