Preferential re-assignment of bought-in land requires strict satisfaction of statutory conditions; cancellation alone does not create entitlement.

Preference for re-assignment of bought-in land under RSO 45(4) arises only if the assigning authority is satisfied that the original owner was not a willful defaulter, the default occurred due to circumstances beyond his control, and the proposed re-assignment is otherwise unobjectionable. Mere cancellation of an earlier assignment to third parties does not by itself create an entitlement to preferential reassignment. The Court also noted that the absence of notice before the earlier assignment did not independently confer a right to restoration where the mandatory preconditions for preference were not shown to exist.

---

---

Issues: Whether the original owner or his heir was entitled to preferential re-assignment of the bought-in land under RSO 45(4) merely because the earlier assignment to third parties was cancelled, without proving that the original owner was not a willful defaulter and that the default occurred due to circumstances beyond his control.

Analysis: RSO 45(4) governs disposal of bought-in lands and grants preference to the original owner or undisputed heirs only when the assigning authority is satisfied that the original owner was not a willful defaulter, that the default was due to circumstances beyond control, and that reassignment is otherwise unobjectionable. The notice-and-reassignment procedure is triggered only after those preconditions are met. Mere cancellation of a prior assignment does not by itself establish entitlement to preference. On the facts, no material showed satisfaction of the statutory preconditions, and the long delay in seeking restoration further undermined the claim. The failure to issue a notice before the earlier assignment did not independently confer a right to re-assignment in the absence of the mandatory conditions.

Conclusion: The claim for preferential re-assignment was not maintainable, and the challenge based only on want of notice could not succeed.

Ratio Decidendi: Preference in reassignment of bought-in land under RSO 45(4) is available only on strict satisfaction of the prescribed conditions, and it cannot arise merely from cancellation of an earlier assignment.

---