Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

account of acquisition of their house/property or have been rendered landless as defined therein and thereby held to be eligible in terms of the norms of the Scheme by the competent Authority, which is not less than the Deputy Commissioner of the concerned District. He thereafter referred to Annexure R-1/II appended with the reply of r to respondent No. 1 and submitted that in terms of the list of houseless/landless of families of Kol Dam Project, village Aahan, Tehsil Sundernagar, District Mandi, the petitioner was neither houseless nor landless nor otherwise belonging to the eligible family, for the reason that there was no entry in the Panchayat Parivar Register of the Panchayat relating to the petitioner as on the date when the notification was issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1884, because the petitioner was not the resident of the Panchayat concerned. Accordingly, he submitted that there is no infirmity in the denial of the benefits of the Scheme to the petitioner and the petition deserves dismissal.

them houseless and landless. The policy obviously was for the benefit of those, who were permanently residing in the area and who were to be rendered houseless and landless on account of acquisition proceedings which were being undertaken by the Government for the purpose of construction of the Kol Dam Hydroelectric Project.

6. Now here is a case where admittedly the petitioner, who happens to be a resident of village Binga, Tehsil Sarkaghat, District Mandi, purchased two biswas of land in village Aahan, neither a biswansi less nor a biswansi more, as it appears, he was aware of the act of the respondents coming up with the project in the area. Though, the petitioner has very conveniently concealed the date of purchase of land as the same has not been mentioned in the writ petition, but one fact which is evident and which could not be denied by learned Counsel for the petitioner is that as on the date when the land of the petitioner was acquired in the year 2000, his name was not registered in the Panchayat Parivar Register of the village concerned, which is a pre-condition for the purpose of getting the benefit of the Scheme in terms of Clause 2.2.3 of the same.

7. This is also so stated in para-4 of the reply filed by the respondents-State, wherein it is clearly mentioned that as the family of the petitioner was not recorded in the Panchayat Parivar Register of village Aahan, Tehsil Sundernagar as on 07.12.2000, which is 2025:HHC:29048 .

necessarily required for the purpose of getting the benefit of Rehabilitation Policy as framed by the Government, therefore, he was not entitled for any such benefit.

8. Respondent No. 1 has appended Annexure R-1/II with its reply which is the agreement entered into between respondent No. 1 and State of H.P. and H.P. State Electricity Board. In para 1.2(b) of the agreement, family has been defined as under:-

"(b)"Family" means husband/wife, who is entered as owner/co-owner of land in the Revenue Record, their children including step or adopted children and include his/her parents and those brothers and sisters who are living jointly with him/her as per entries of Panchayat Privar Register as on the date of Notification under Section-4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Provided that only the Panchayat Parivar Register entry, as it stood on the date of Notification under Section-4 of the Land Acquisition act, 1894 shall be taken into account for the purpose of 'Separate Family' for Rehabilitation benefit i.e. consideration for employment etc."