Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

12. According to the petitioner, he had moved an application before the Secretary Revenue-cum- Secretary Relief and Rehabilitation exercising revisional powers under the Displaced Persons Act for tracing missing documents from the two files and also the objection against the report of the A.D.M. Shimla, who had held that certain documents were missing from the file but did not fix responsibility.

13. Aggrieved, the petitioner is in this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

45. It may be noticed that the petitioner made a grievance and filed an application before the Chief Settlement Commissioner that certain documents have been removed from the files at the instance of husband of respondent No. 5 who was a Senior Police Officer at the relevant time. In fact, the revision petition filed by the respondent No. 5 before the Chief Settlement Commissioner has been signed by Mr. T.R. Mahajan designating himself as Director General of police and general power of attorney. Even the report which was called for by the Financial Commissioner-cum-Secretary Relief and Rehabilitation shows that certain documents have been removed or are missing but the Additional District Magistrate, Shimla who enquired into the matter took a view that there was no evidence to show that the husband of the respondent No. 5 was instrumental in getting those papers removed. The fact remains that certain relevant papers had been removed from the files which would also indicate that there was no sufficient material on record for the Chief Settlement Commissioner to have concluded that the sale certificate was tampered with or the area of Cosy Nook Estate was not 856.5 sq. yds. or was 576 sq. yds.

48. It is admitted position that the original sale certificate is missing and is not available on record. A serious allegation was made by the petitioner that certain documents have been removed firom the records for which husband of the petitioner Mr. T.R. Mahajan, a retired Director General of Police, who then was a very Senior serving Police Officer is responsible for the same. An inquiry was made by the Additional District Magistrate, Shimla who found that the documents indeed were missing from the file but could not pin point how and when these documents were removed. This position give credence to the allegation or insinuation made by the petitioner.