Heard learned counsel for the parties.
By an order dated 8.02.1972, Special Land Acquisition Officer, Saundatti,
allotted plot no. 749, Block Nos. 1-2 of Rampura village District Belgaum, State of
Karnataka, to the appellant by treating him as displaced person. After one month
and twenty eight days, the concerned officer passed order dated 30.03.1972 whereby
he revised the allotment and allotted plot no. 749 to respondent no.2 – Imamsab
Mohamadsab Dupadal and one Fakiramma wife of Meerasah Pinjar. The appellant
did not challenge the allotment made in favour of respondent no.2 and Fakiramma
but, after more than twenty years, the Special Officer passed order dated 9.7.1992
whereby he cancelled the allotment made in favour of respondent no.2 and
Fakiramma on the ground that respondent no.2 is residing at Betageri in Dharwad
district and no document was produced in support of his eligibility as displaced
person.
Respondent no.2 challenged order dated 9.7.1992 in Writ Petition No.
6484/1999, which was allowed by the learned Single Judge on 22.2.2000 on the ground
that there was no tangible reason for cancellation of the allotment after twenty years
and that too without affording opportunity of hearing to the allottee and making an
inquiry. The Division
...2/-
Bench of the High Court dismissed the writ appeal preferred by the appellant and
confirmed the findings recorded by the learned Single Judge for invalidation of order
dated 9.7.1992.
In our view, when the order of cancellation was quashed on the ground
that the same was passed without giving notice to respondent no.2, the learned Single
Judge ought to have given liberty to the concerned authority to pass fresh order in
accordance with law. His failure to do so has caused prejudice to the appellant
herein. The Division Bench too committed the same error by not leaving it open to
the concerned officer to pass fresh order.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part, impugned orders are modified
and it is made clear that the concerned officer shall be free to pass fresh order in
accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the affected
persons.
No costs.
[G.S. SINGHVI] New Delhi, April 01, 2009.