BALIA, J.— Shortly stated the facts giving rise to this petition are as under :—

Petitioner applied for temporary allotment of the lands in Rajasthan Canal Colony area, Tehsil Anoopgarh in the year 1970. The petitioner was allotted square No. 299/401 measuring twenty four bighas of agricultural land in Chak 2 ANM, subsequently re-named as Chak 2 LSM, on temporary cultivation lease in the year 1970. The tenancy in favour of the petitioner was renewed year to year until this land was permanently allotted in his favour vide order dated 21 st Jan. 1974 by the Land Allotting Authority-cum -Assistant Commissioner Colonisation, Rajasthan/Canal Project, Shri Vijaynagar. The petitioner is personally cultivating the land since the date of his temporary allotment. A complaint was lodged by one Shri Nichhatar Singh that petitioner has obtained permanent allotment in his favour by not disclosing that petitioners father had six bighas irrigated and eight bighas barani land in Chak 10/0 and that petitioner has also purchased three bighas irrigated land in Chak 10/0 in 1971. Vide order dated 7.8.79 (Ex.2), the Allotting Authority after recording the evidence and statement of the petitioner cancelled the allotment made in favour of the petitioner in its entirety by having recourse to Rule 21 of the Rajasthan Colonisation (Allotment and Sale of Government Land in Rajasthan Canal Colony Area) Rules, 1975, hereinafter called as the Rules of 1975. The petitioner objected to the cancellation of the allotment on the ground that so far as the land held by his father is concerned, the same is self acquired property of his father and he has no share, therefore, the same cannot be considered for the purposes of determining whether the petitioner held any land at the time when allotment to him was made. Regarding the land held by the petitioner himself it was stated that land has been purchased by the petitioner on 28.7.1971 measuring three bighas and 1.25 biswas in Chak 10/0 after he has already been allotted land on temporary basis. Therefore, when the land was first allotted on temporary basis, petitioner had no share or interest in any other land, therefore, there was no mis-statement on his behalf. Since the petitioner had applied for converting temporary lease holding into parmanent lease holding, therefore, the petitioner made an application on the basis of his temporary cultivation lease holding for permanent allotment as such without taking into account the land acquired by him after the temporary cultivation lease was granted in his favour in 1970. The petitioner contended that at any rate on the basis of his personal holding, allotment, if at all, has to be cancelled, can be cancelled only upto 3 bighas and 1.25 biswas of land which he was allotted on permanent basis in excess of the maximum limit which could have been allotted to him and allotment made in favour of the petitioner should not have been cancelled in its entirety.

2. The petitioners appeal was dismissed by the Revenue Appellate Authority on 25/11/80 (Ex.3). The petitioners revision before the Board of Revenue was also dismissed vide Ex.4 order dated 20.07.1982. Hence the petitioner has challenged the orders Exs. 2,3 and 4 cancelling the allotment made in favour of the petitioner in its entirety.

3. A return has been filed on behalf of the State by stating that the allotment has been obtained by suppression of facts about previous holding of land in his own name and in the name of his father, therefore the Allotting Authority was competent under section 11 read with 14 of the Rajasthan Colonisation Act, 1954 as well as rule 21 of the Rules of 1975. It has been contended before us that the lands held by father have to be disclosed only if the father holds the land as a Karta of Joint Hindu Family in which the son has a share by birth. Only then the holding by father becomes relevant otherwise holdings of self acquired property in the name of father is not relevant for determining elig

Click Here to Read the rest of this document