Back
1992 Supreme(All) 519
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
S.R. MISRA, J.
Ibrahim Khan - Appellant
Versus
Deputy Director of Consolidation - Respondent
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 11637 of 1984
Decided on : Sep 16, 1992
Prakash Chandra, G.N. Verma, R.N. Sharma, R.S. Mishra, R.P. Mishra, B.B. Paul
The sale certificate issued by the Custodian under the Administration of Evacuee Property Act is final and binding, and the Consolidation Authorities are bound to follow it in determining the shares of the parties.
Headnote:
CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS ACT - SECTION 48-A - DETERMINATION OF SHARES - SALE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY CUSTODIAN - FINALITY - MUTATION ORDER - EFFECT.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner Ibrahim Khan challenged the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation, which dismissed his revision and allowed the revisions of Abdul Aziz and Shariff. The dispute arose from the consolidation of holdings, where part of the land was declared evacuee property and acquired by the Custodian, and the remaining land was subject to consolidation proceedings. The petitioner claimed that the shares should be determined based on the remaining land, excluding the acquired portion, and that the mutation order in his favor should be given effect to.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the determination of shares by the Consolidation Authorities was correct and in accordance with the sale certificate issued by the Custodian. The court found that the sale certificate was final and binding, and that the mutation order in favor of the petitioner was in conflict with the sale certificate. The court also found that the finding of the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) and the Deputy Director of Consolidation that Smt. Khatoon Begum was the daughter of Hamidan was a finding of fact and did not warrant interference in the writ jurisdiction.
Issues: 1. Whether the shares should be determined based on the remaining land, excluding the acquired portion, or on the entire original holding? 2. Whether the mutation order in favor of the petitioner should be given effect to, despite the sale certificate issued by the Custodian? 3. Whether the finding that Smt. Khatoon Begum was the daughter of Hamidan was erroneous?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the shares should be determined based on the entire original holding, including the portion acquired by the Custodian and subsequently sold to the petitioner's father and other family members. The court reasoned that the sale certificate issued by the Custodian was final and binding, and that the Consolidation Authorities were bound to follow it. 2. The court held that the mutation order in favor of the petitioner could not be given effect to, as it was in conflict with the sale certificate. The court found that the sale certificate was the final determination of the rights of the parties, and that the Consolidation Authorities could not alter it. 3. The court held that the finding that Smt. Khatoon Begum was the daughter of Hamidan was a finding of fact and did not warrant interference in the writ jurisdiction.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.
S.R. Misra. J.
1. By means of present writ petition, petitioner Ibrahim Khan has challenged the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 28-7-1984, by means of which the Deputy Director of Consolidation has dismissed the revision riled by the petitioner and allowed two revisions of Abdul Aziz and Shariff The brief facts given rise to this writ petition are as follows :- Properties owned by the petitioner shown in pedigree were declared to be evacuee property and was acquired by the Custodian to the extent of 19/66 share of the total land of 62 Bigha 14 Biswa. Such land acquired by the custodian was subsequently purchased by Ismail Khan, Mohammad Sher and Abdul Aziz. Accordingly a certificate of sale was issued by the Assistant Custodian, Agra on 11-7-1962, giving the details of the land, a copy of which is also on the record as annexure-l to this writ petition. Subsequently, the name of the respective purchasers of their evacuee property was mutated in the papers on the respective land. According to the petitioner the remaining area after excluding the portion acquired by the Custodian and sold, 44 Bigha and 13 Biswa was the remaining land of Khata No. 82 when the notification under section 4 of the CH Act was made and thereafter the Consolidation Authorities are required to decide the shares of the respective parties in this area of 44 Bighas 13 Biswa.
2. In the basic year, the names of Ibrahim, Abdul Aziz and Shaukat, Bundu Khan and Bashir. Manzur Khan, Mohd. Sharif and Latif, Smt. Hamidan, Abdul Aziz, Kaley Khan, Shamshuddin and the Asstt. Custodian were recorded.
Five sets of objections were filed before the Consolidation Officer. The first objection was filed by Ibrahim on the ground that the name of Assistant Custodian had wrongly been recorded as the land acquired by the Assistant Custodian had already been purchased by the respective transferees and their names have been recorded He has further pleaded that the name of Bundu Khan was also wrongly recorded as he had been declared evacuee. According to him Aziz Khan s/o Nazir died issueless and hence his name be expunged and thus he claimed 4/9 share.
3. Another objection was filed by Aziz on the ground that the name of Azim s/o Nazir be expunged as he had died issueless. Shaukat died leaving a son Ashiq Ali to be his heir. He further pleaded that the name of Sharif and Latif be expunged. Third objection was filed by Anwar Khan Fourth objection was filed by Kaley Khan alias Kalian and the last objection was filed by Smt Khatoon Begum, according to whom her father had got l/4th share which was succeeded by Smt. Hamidan, widow of Bundu Khan. Bundu Khan had also died and Smt. Khatoon Begum claimed herself to be entitled being the daughter of Smt. Hamidan.
4. Consolidation Officer rejected the objection of Anwar and Smt. Khatoon Begum and allowed the objection of Ibrahim and Kaiey Khan. The Consolidation Officer held that the name of the Assistant Custodian be expunged in place of Shaukat Ali, the name of his son Ashiq Ali be recorded and at the place of Bundu Khan, Manzur Khan and Ramzani the names of their heir Bashir be recorded and it was further held that the name of Smt. Hamidan be expunged and determined the shares of the parties accordingly including the share of the petitioner as 3/8th. He further held that Smt. Khatun Begum has failed to prove herself to be the daughter of Smt. Hamidan.
Six appeals were filed before the Settlement Officer Consolidation. All the appeals were consolidated and disposed of by a common judgment. The Settlement Officer Consolidation held that Bundu Khan was never declared evacuee and hence his share comes to 1/4th which was succeeded by Smt. Hamidan. He further held that Smt Khatoon being the daughter of Hamidan also succeeded and hence the Settlement Officer, Consolidation determined the share of Smt. Khatoon Begum as 1/4th and the share of Ibrahim as 17/48th. Three revisions were preferred before the Deputy Director o
