https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184873 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. en-us Thu, 16 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Jul 2016 18:40:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184873 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. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184873