Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

7. It is not in dispute that rental compensation was being received by the contesting respondents right from the date of requisition of the land, i.e. 14.1.74, uninterruptedly, and without any objection from petitioner and proforma respondents. The apportionment statement annexed with the award is in continuity to the apportionment statement made by the Competent Authority since the date of acquisition. The Divisional Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner, while adjudicating upon the apportionment, have in unequivocal terms determined that the petitioner and pro-forma respondents are not entitled for any compensation as their names do not stood reflected in cultivation column of the apportionment statement. It may further be pointed out that out of total area of land measuring 330 kanals 15 marlas in both the kewat Nos. 38 and 39, the share of the petitioner and others and the respondents is 132 kanals-02 Marlas and 198 kanals-15 marlas respectively. The total recorded share of petitioner and others in both the khewats, they are in possession of 144 Kls-16 Mls which is 12 Kanals 14 marlas in excess of their recorded share. Whereas, the respondents on the other hand against total recorded share of 198 kanals 13 marlas of land, are in possession of 185 kanals 12 marlas, which is less by 12 kanals 14 marals. Since the respondents are not found in possession of land more than the recorded share in the aforesaid khewats, they are entitled to the release of the entire compensation of land acquired by the Army to the exclusion of the petitioner and others. As regards the plea raised by Mr. Wazir Learned Counsel for the petitioner, that since the jamabandi for the year 2054-2055 BK is available, the jamabandi for the year 1994-95 looses its relevance and significance, it is submitted by Mr. Raina Learned counsel for the respondents that no jamabandi after 1998 has been duly prepared and attested in Village Maheen Sarkar. He further submitted that copy of the Jamabandi purported to be for the year 1998-99 BK lying with the patwari Halqa (Parat Sarkar of which is nowhere existing), is neither duly and correctly prepared nor authenticated or attested in the prescribed manner. In such event the copy of the latter jamabandi, if any, is part of patwar, has no legal sanctity as original jamabandi (parat Sarkar) is neither existing nor reported to have been prepared and attested. Further submission of Mr. Raina is that there is continuous entries in the Khasra Girdawai right from 1994 BK till date of the respondents, in cultivation column. There is also report of revenue agency regarding the non-existing of parat sarkar. The contention of Mr. Wazir in this context cannot be accepted being devoid of legal force.