The Central Government's powers under Section 33 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954, are residuary and can be invoked as a last resort, even after the acceptance of a bid and communication to the bidder, if the sale process has not been completed.

1. Two persons contending for the same evacuee house situated in the town of Sirsa have separately filed Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 1086 and 1662 of 1972 under Articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of India to challenge the correctness of an order dated 22-2-1972 (Annexure C to Civil Writ Petition No. 1086 of 1972) passed by the Secretary to Government, Haryana (respondent No. 1) exercising the powers of the Central Government under Section 33 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954. Both these petitions can be conveniently disposed of together.

2. The facts of the case are that a public auction of the evacuee house in question was held on 17-3-1960 and Shri Ram Saran Dass petitioner in Civil Writ Petition No. 1086 of 1972 had made the highest bid of Rs. 12,200/- at that auction. According to Rule 90(8) of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules 1955, as then prevailing, he had to deposit ten percent of the price as earnest money on the fall of hammer but as he was a displaced person having verified claim for compensation, he was allowed to execute an indemnity bond in the prescribed form given in Appendix XXI-A to the Rules. He, however, took no steps for more than ten years to deposit the earnest money or the balance of the price and it may appear that no progress towards the completion of the sale was made by the parties in accordance with the provisions of the various sub-rules of Rule 90 ibid. It was in fact found in 1968 that the verified claim that the petitioner had furnished as security for the earnest money had been spent up for exhausted. There is, therefore, nothing on record to suggest that any completed sale in favour of Shri Ram Saran Dass Petitioner had been effected so as to bring in the application of Rule 92 which lays down the procedure for the setting aside of a sale which has been made under Rule 90 or 91. In fact the petitioners bid had never been formally accepted by any officer or authority having jurisdiction to do so and the terminus a quo for the making of an application for the setting aside of the sale had not arisen as visualised by Rule 92(2)(a) ibid.

3. The house in dispute was in the occupation of one Gian Chand allottee up to the year 1964. It is no apparent from the record how Gian Chand ceased to be in occupation and how Arjan Singh petitioner in Civil Writ Petition No. 1662 of 1972 came to be in possession. He was, however, not a displaced person according to respondents Nos. 1 to 5. He had been asked to furnish an affidavit if he claimed to be a bona fide displaced person but no such affidavit has been furnished by him so far. In 1967, Shri Arjan Singh petitioner had put in an application for the transfer of the property in his favour. The Managing Officer had rejected that application on 22-11-1968 on the ground that no orders for the appearance or rejection of the highest bid made at the public auction on 17-3-1960 by Shri Ram Saran Dass petitioner had been passed by any competent authority. Shri Arjan Singh had made a second application to the same effect on 5-5-1969. The Managing Officer had recommended by his order dated 12-9-1969 that the property may be transferred to Shri Arjan Singh subject to its allotability. According to certain policy instructions issued by the department, evacuee units having a value of more than Rs. 10,000/- could not be transferred to reserve price. This maximum limit had been raised to Rupees 15,000/- in 1963. The property was above the maximum limit of allotability when it was auctioned in 1960 as may appear from the highest bid made by Shri Ram Saran Dass. The prices of the property have been steeply going up throughout the last ten years and it can safely be assumed that by the year 1967 when Shri Arjan Singh made his first application for the transfer of the property, the margin of about Rs. 3,000/- between the highest bid made for the property in 1960 and the maximum limit as raised in 1963