Discretion under rehabilitation rules bars a claimed right to buy excess allotted land; "may" is not "shall".

Rule 73(2)(ii) of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules, 1955 was construed as conferring discretion on the Settlement Commissioner, not imposing a mandatory duty to transfer excess allotted land on payment or adjustment of compensation. Applying the settled interpretation of the word "may" in a pari materia rehabilitation provision, the Court held that the rule did not create an enforceable right for an allottee to demand sale of excess area. A mandatory reading would undermine the rehabilitation scheme by favouring mistaken or excessive allotments over rightful claimants with verified claims. The High Court's view was set aside and the cancellation of the excess allotment was restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether Rule 73(2)(ii) of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules, 1955 imposed a mandatory duty on the Settlement Commissioner to transfer excess allotment to the allottee on payment or adjustment of compensation, or conferred only a discretion.

Analysis: The rule used the expression "may", and the governing interpretation had already been settled by a Constitution Bench in relation to a pari materia provision under the same scheme of rehabilitation rules. On that construction, "may" could not be read as "shall", and the rule did not create an enforceable right in favour of a person who had received land in excess of lawful entitlement to demand sale of the excess area. A contrary reading would defeat the object of the rehabilitation scheme by rewarding mistaken or excessive allotments at the expense of rightful claimants with verified claims.

Conclusion: The rule was discretionary, not mandatory, and the allottees had no legal right to compel transfer of the excess land.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the High Court's view on Rule 73(2)(ii) succeeded, and the administrative order restoring cancellation of the excess allotment stood revived.

Ratio Decidendi: The expression "may" in the relevant rehabilitation rule confers discretion on the Settlement Commissioner and does not create a legal right in the allottee to demand transfer of excess land.

---