SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(J&K) 643

J&K SPECIAL TRIBUNAL AT JAMMU
Madan Lal, J.
Vinod Kalra -Appellant
Versus
Custodian Evacuee Property, Jammu & Anr. -Resopndent
File No. STJ-688
Decided On : 25-11-2013

The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for adherence to procedural rules, particularly the necessity of serving a show cause notice before canceling an allotment under the Evacuees' (Administration of Property) Act 2006, Rule 14.

Headnote:

Evacuee Property - Allotment Dispute - Evacuees' (Administration of Property) Act 2006, Rule 14 - The court discussed the provisions of the Evacuees' (Administration of Property) Act 2006, particularly Rule 14, which outlines the grounds for cancellation of allotment and the procedure to be followed by the Custodian. The court emphasized the importance of following the legal provisions and highlighted the requirement for serving a show cause notice before canceling an allotment. The decision was influenced by the interpretation of Rule 14 and the finding that the allotment was canceled without adhering to the prescribed rules.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner's father was the bonafide allottee of an Evacuee Property shop, which was later allotted to the petitioner. The allotment was canceled without a show cause notice, leading to a legal dispute.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the cancellation of the allotment was illegal and in violation of the Evacuees' (Administration of Property) Act 2006. The court upheld the petitioner's allotment and set aside the impugned order.

Issues: The main issues revolved around the legality of the cancellation of the allotment, the violation of procedural rules, and the rights of the allottee under the Evacuees' (Administration of Property) Act 2006.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the finding that the cancellation of the allotment did not adhere to the procedural requirements outlined in Rule 14 of the Evacuees' (Administration of Property) Act 2006. The court emphasized the importance of following the legal provisions and providing a show cause notice before canceling an allotment.

Final Decision: The court allowed the revision petition, set aside the impugned order, and upheld the petitioner's allotment of the Evacuee Property shop.

1. Brief facts of the case is that Evacuee Property shop no. 213 situated at Mohalla Pir Mitha, Jammu was previously allotted to the father of the petitioner namely Sh.Ved Rattan Kalra who has been bonafide allottee of the said shop prior to the year 1990.After the death of the father of the petitioner, allotment of above said E.P. shop was made to the petitioner and since then petitioner is regularly depositing the rent of the shop to the E.P. Department and abiding by the terms and conditions of the agreement executed with the Custodian EP Jammu and allotment order, copies of the rent receipt since 1990 onwards are enclosed as Annexure "A" collectively.

2. Further stated that respondent no. 2 is the son of the petitioner. Petitioner was also running the business of stationery in the said allotted EP shop. In the year 2004 the respondent in connivance with the Custodian and other staff of the EP Department, preferred an application before the then Custodian EP Jammu for allotment of the said shop in his name. The Custodian without serving any show cause notice required under rule 14 of the of the Rules framed under the Evacuees' (Administration of Property) Act 2006 illegally and in violation of the provisions of EP Act and Rules cancelled the allotment of the petitioner without any violation on the part of the petitioner in respect of the above s aid EP shop as per order dated 25.9.2004.

3. Petitioner came to know about the illegal order dated 25.9.2004 passed by Custodian Evacuee Property, Jammu preferred a review petition before the Custodian Evacuee Property, Jammu u/s 30 (5) of Evacuee Act 2006. Respondent no. 2 is the family member of the petitioner and was not holding a separate family and the Custodian EP Jammu has cancelled the allotment of the petitioner without serving any show cause notice. However, Custodian EP Jammu after adjudicating on the review petition, quashed the order dated 25.9.2004 passed by the then Custodian and uphold the allotment of the petitioner in respect of the said EP shop in dispute. Copy of the order dated 9.1.2006 passed by the then Custodian Evacuee Property, Jammu and copy of the voter list wherein respondents is reflected as one of the family member of the petitioner and copy of the ration card are enclosed as Annexure -- B,C,D and E.

4. Further stated that petitioner had constructed one room of the shop with the permission of Custodian in the year 1997 and Custodian cancelled the allotment from the name o f the petitioner without any legal ground and the said order of the Custodian was challenged before the Custodians General vide order dated 6.3.1999 and then learned Custodian General, Jammu quashed the order dated 18.12.1997 passed by the then Custodian and upheld the allotment of the petitioner as per order dated 6.3.1999. Copies of the order annexed as Annexure F and G respectively. Custodian General passed the impugned order dated 2.4.2009 and did not considered the illegality committed by the then Custodian vide order dated 25.9.2004 whereby then custodian without hearing the petitioner and without consent of the petitioner clandestinely cancelled the allotment from the name of the petitioner by misrepresentation on the part of respondent. Custodian General has not gone through the illegalities committed by the then Custodian who illegally and in violations of the Evacuees' Property Act and rules made there under cancelled the allotment of the petitioner and illegally allotted the shop in dispute to the respondent.

5. Further stated that Custodian Evacuee Property Jammu has legally entertained the review petition preferred by the petitioner under section 30(5) of EP Act 2006 and quashed the illegal order dated 25.09.2004. Learned Custodian general in its order as held that Custodian can not entertain a review petition and has illegally and in violation of the provision of EP Act and rules made there under quashed the order dated 9.1.2006 passed by the Custodian Evacuee Property Jammu





























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top