Back
1982 Supreme(HP) 50
High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
M.S.MUKHERJEE
RAMA NAND - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH - Respondent
Nautor Review Cases Nos. 15/82 & 16/82
Decided On : 09/18/1982
For Petitioners:Devinder Gupta. For Respondents: Amar Chand.
The H.P. Nautor Rules, 1954, were applicable to the case, as the relevant dates for the allotment of Nautor lands were prior to the enforcement of the H.P. Nautor Rules, 1968. Under the 1954 Rules, a person belonging to a neighboring revenue estate was eligible for allotment of Nautor lands. The petitioners, who were serving defense personnel, were entitled to preference in the allotment of Nautor lands, but this did not mean that they were entitled to be allotted land for whatever area they had applied for.
Headnote:
NAUTOR LAND ALLOTMENT - H.P. NAUTOR RULES, 1954 AND 1968 - APPLICABILITY - PREFERENCE TO ARMED FORCES PERSONNEL - INTERPRETATION OF RULES - VALIDITY OF ALLOTMENTS.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute over the allotment of Nautor lands in Himachal Pradesh. Four individuals, including the petitioners, had applied for Nautor lands in the same area. The Deputy Commissioner initially sanctioned Nautor in favor of the petitioners, but later reduced their allotments and sanctioned Nautor in favor of two other individuals, who were harijans. The petitioners challenged this decision, and the case went through several rounds of appeals and reviews.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the H.P. Nautor Rules, 1954, were applicable to the case, as the relevant dates for the allotment of Nautor lands were prior to the enforcement of the H.P. Nautor Rules, 1968. Under the 1954 Rules, a person belonging to a neighboring revenue estate was eligible for allotment of Nautor lands. The court also held that the petitioners, who were serving defense personnel, were entitled to preference in the allotment of Nautor lands, but this did not mean that they were entitled to be allotted land for whatever area they had applied for.
Issues: 1. Which Nautor rules were applicable to the case: the H.P. Nautor Rules, 1954 or the H.P. Nautor Rules, 1968? 2. Whether the petitioners, who were serving defense personnel, were entitled to preference in the allotment of Nautor lands? 3. Whether the petitioners were entitled to be allotted land for whatever area they had applied for?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the H.P. Nautor Rules, 1954, were applicable to the case, as the relevant dates for the allotment of Nautor lands were prior to the enforcement of the H.P. Nautor Rules, 1968. 2. The court held that the petitioners, who were serving defense personnel, were entitled to preference in the allotment of Nautor lands, but this did not mean that they were entitled to be allotted land for whatever area they had applied for. 3. The court held that the petitioners were not entitled to be allotted land for whatever area they had applied for.
Final Decision: The court set aside the order of the lower court and upheld the order of the Divisional Commissioner, which had confirmed the orders of the Deputy Commissioner. The court directed the Deputy Commissioner to ensure that all the four persons were promptly given possession of the lands as decided by the Divisional Commissioner.
1. In this order I would dispose of both the review cases as they refer to similar facts and points in issue.
2. Briefly speaking the facts of the case are that Shri Rama Nand and Shri Kishori Lai had originally applied before the Deputy Commissioner, Mahasu for sanction of Nautor lands for 9-6 bighas and 9-12 bighas respectively in the Revenue Estate Milion. The Deputy Commissioner in separate orders dated 25th May, 1964 sanctioned Nautor in favour of both these persons of areas as applied for by them. Shri Rama Nand was thus sanctioned Nautor in Kharsa No. 1015/83/1 and Shri Kishori Lal in Khasra No. 1015/83/2. While Shri Rama Nand and Kishori Lal had applied for land in village Milion, the other two persons, namely Shri Jiwanu Ram and Shri Dhan Sukh who were harijans had applied for Nautor in the same area and their applications had been submitted prior to the applications of Shri Rama Nand and Shri Kishori Lal.
3. Since Shri Jiwanu Rams case had been decided favourably by the Deputy Commissioner, he went in appeal before the Financial Commissioner (there was no Divisional Commissioner at that time). The learned Additional Financial Commissioner for a fresh decision by giving opportunity to all the parties to present their cases. The Deputy Commissioner, Mahasu them in his order dated 29414967 considered the applications of all the four persons. He then decided that the previous allotments to Shri Rama Nand, Shri Kishori Lai should be reduced to 5 bighas each. He simultaniously sanctioned Nautor in favour of Shri Jiwanu Ram and Shri Dhan Sukh at the rate of 2 bighas each.
4. Since this reduced allotments of S/Shri Rama Nand and Kishori Lal, they went in appeal before the Divisional Commissioner against these orders of the Deputy Commissioner. The Divisional Commissioner in order dated 23-3-1968 remanded all the cases to the Deputy Commissioner, Mahasu for reconsideration. The Deputy Commissioner, Mahasu again went into the facts of the cases. He then passed order dated the 15th July, 1969 confirming his previous order dated 29-11-1967. He further observed in the said order that Shri Kishori Lal had not so far been given possession of the land ( 2-12 bighas) as earlier allotted to him (by his order dated 25-5-1964). Since Shri Kishori Lal and Rama Nand were brothers the possession of 9-16 bighas earlier given to Shri Rama Nand should now be evenly divided between two brother in terms of his subsequent orders dated 29-11-1967 and the remaining area of 0-4 bighas should be allotted to them now to make up their dues.
5. Both Shri Rama Nand and Shri Kishori Lai went in appeal before Divisional Commissioner against this order of the Deputy Commissioner, in his detailed order dated the 15th May, 1970 considered the claims and rights of all the four persons on marits. His decision then was to sanction Nautor in favour of these persons as follows ;—
1. Shri Kishori Lal 7-10 bighas.
2. Shri Rama Nand 4-0 bighas.
3. Shri Jiwanu Ram 4-0 bighas.
4. Shri Dhan Sukh 2-0 bighas.
6. The Divisional Commissioner also observed that there were still 102 frees standing on the pieces of land now allotted to S/Shri Kishori Lai and Rama Nand in the scale of 2-13 bighas each. This additional 2-10 bighas was sanctioned to them each on the specific condition that the trees would not be cut.
7. S/Shri Rama Nand and Kishori Lai again went the Financial Commissioner against this order of the Divisional Commissioner asking for restoration of the original grant as initially sanctioned by the Deputy Commissioner on the 25th May, 1964.
8. The learned Financial Commissioner in his order dated the 26th August, 1971 decided these appeals and upheld the order of the learned Divisional Commissioner dated the 15th May, 1970. S/Shri Kishori Lal and Rama Nand then preferred a Review petition before the Financial Commissioner against his order dated the 26th August, 1971. the then learned Financial Commissioner considered the case on 10th December, 1976. He then remanded t
