Ch. ZAHOOR AHMAD vs DADU KHAN AND Other
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the High Court regarding the validity of the transfer of a plot. The core legal question is whether the transfer of an open plot to a local individual, Saroon Khan, was legally permissible under the prevailing settlement laws, and consequently, whether that plot remained available for subsequent auction to other respondents. The petitioner contends that the High Court erred in holding that the initial transfer was invalid because the transferee was not a claimant, thereby overlooking the provisions of paragraph 13 of the Schedule to the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958, read with Settlement Scheme VI. The Supreme Court found that the petitioner's arguments regarding the validity of the 1960 transfer and the subsequent unavailability of the plot for auction in 1961 raised substantial questions requiring further consideration. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal, directing that the matter be prepared for hearing on the existing record with liberty to file additional documents, noting the significant delay since the case's inception in 1976.
- Can an open plot be transferred to a local individual under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958?
- Does a valid prior transfer of a plot render a subsequent auction of the same property illegal?
- Paragraph 13, Schedule to the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958
- Settlement Scheme VI, Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958
ORDER
1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.-The learned counsel for the petitioner Ch. Khalil. Ur-Rehman, has, inter alia, submitted that the plot in question was transferred to Saroon Khan (deceased) predecessor-in- interest of respondents 1 to 4 on 15,.6-;960 and that the transfer in favour of the said Saroon Khan was perfectly legal inasmuch asp even a local could obtain the transfer of an open plot. The view of the learned Judge in the High Court that the same could not be transferred to him because he was not a claimant was expressed by overlooking the provisions of para. 13 of the Schedule to the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958, read with Settlement Scheme VI.
2. Hence, the said plot having been validly transferred in June; 1960 was not available for transfer by auction in 1961 to respondents 5 and 6.
3. The contention that the learned. Judge in the High Court erred in la in upholding the auction in favour of respondents 5 and 4 on the assumption that the earlier transfer of the plot to Saroon Khan on 15-6-1960 being an illegal transfer did not confer any right, on him and could .Therefore ignored, requires further consideration.
4. Security in sum of Rs. 1,000 The appeal to be made ready on the present record with liberty to the parties to add additional documents, if any and. Put up for hearing very early as this matter has been pending in this Court since 1976.