TMI Blog1974 (4) TMI 105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es under the East Punjab Utilization of Lands Act, 1949, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), in 1952, for 20 years, should be handed over to the rightful owners by the Pattedars as the period of their leases has expired. A preliminary objection to the maintainability of the appeals under Article 136 of the Constitution against the orders of the Collector is not substantiated by citing any authority of this Court. Moreover, there are also Writ Petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution questioning the power of the Collector to deprive the petitioners of their alleged fundamental rights to hold land in their possession until dispossessed in accordance with law. We, therefore, overrule this technical objection. 3. Apparently ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hal , relied upon on behalf of the Respondent State, where there was no disputed question about the enactment under which the admitted leases were given. The peculiar feature of each case before us, whether under appeal or on a Writ Petition, is that there is no Patta or lease forthcoming. It is denied by the appellants and by the petitioners in each case that either the land was given to them under the East Punjab Land Utilization Act or that the alleged owners to whom the land was directed to be handed over have any right or tide left at all even if they had any at any time. 5. Moreover, an affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State of Haryana showing that a good deal of land in dispute vests in the Gram Sabhas or panchayats. If t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here are conflicting assertions and pieces of evidence which seem difficult to reconcile with each other. Hence, we think that these are fit cases in which the Collector may himself go into the following questions before passing any further orders : 1. Was the possession of any of the lands in dispute taken by the State Government under the Utilization of Lands Act and Pattas duly executed under Section 5 of the Act in favour of the alleged lessees? 2. Were any proceedings for awarding compensation under Section 4 of the Act taken in respect of the land alleged to have been leased, and, if so, on what basis were the persons dispossessed compensated ? In other words, are there grounds to believe that the persons to whom the lands were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
