TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Land Allotment Cancellation Overturned: Importance of Evidence and Fairness</h1> <h3>Shauqin Singh and Ors. Versus Desa Singh and Ors.</h3> The High Court set aside the Chief Settlement Commissioner's cancellation of a land allotment to displaced persons due to discrepancies in evidence and ... - Issues:1. Allotment of land to a displaced person.2. Cancellation of land allotment based on fabricated documents.3. Jurisdiction of Chief Settlement Commissioner under the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act.4. Judicial review of Chief Settlement Commissioner's decision.5. High Court's authority to set aside Chief Settlement Commissioner's order.Analysis:1. The case involved the allotment of land to a displaced person who migrated to India post-partition. After the death of the original allottee, his sons complained that the land allotted was of poor quality, leading to a cancellation of the allotment by the Land Claims Officer and a subsequent allotment in a different district. The sons took possession, cultivated the land, and made improvements.2. Subsequently, the Chief Settlement Commissioner cancelled this allotment based on alleged fabricated documents. The High Court was petitioned under Article 226 of the Constitution to challenge this cancellation. The court observed discrepancies in the evidence presented and the Commissioner's decision, leading to a reversal of the cancellation order.3. The judgment delved into the jurisdiction of the Chief Settlement Commissioner under the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act. The Act empowers the Commissioner to cancel allotments obtained through fraud or false representation. The Commissioner's satisfaction with the evidence is crucial for exercising this power, subject to judicial review.4. The Chief Settlement Commissioner's decision was scrutinized by the High Court, which found discrepancies in the evidence considered and the conclusion drawn. The lack of original documents and failure to consider relevant evidence led the court to set aside the Commissioner's order, emphasizing the quasi-judicial nature of the decision.5. The High Court's authority to review and set aside the Chief Settlement Commissioner's order was upheld, highlighting the importance of evidence and proper consideration in such decisions. The appeal against the High Court's decision was dismissed, affirming the court's competence in judicial review matters.In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the significance of evidence, jurisdictional facts, and proper consideration in decisions related to land allotments to displaced persons, emphasizing the role of judicial review in ensuring fairness and justice in such matters.
TaxTMI 
