The Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act,1954
Section 19. Power to vary or cancel lease or allotment of any property acquired under this Act
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any contract or any other law for the time being in force but subject to any rules that may be made under this Act, the managing officer or managing corporation may cancel any allotment or terminate any lease or amend the terms of any lease or allotment under which any evacuee property acquired under this Act is held or occupied by a person, whether such allotment or lease was granted before or after the commencement of this Act.
(2) Where any person,–
(a) has ceased to be entitled to the possession of any evacuee property by reason of any action taken under sub-section (1), or
(b) is otherwise in un-authorised possession of any evacuee property or any other immovable property forming part of the compensation pool, he shall, after he has been given a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against his eviction from such property, surrender possession of the property on demand being made in this behalf by the managing officer or managing corporation or by any other person duly authorised by such officer or corporation.
(3)If any person fails to surrender possession of any property on demand made under sub-section (2), the managing officer or managing corporation may notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law for the time being in force, eject such person and take possession of such property and may, for such purpose, use or cause to be used such force as may be necessary.
(4)Where a managing officer or a managing corporation is satisfied that any person, whether by way of allotment or lease, is, or has at any time been, in possession of any evacuee property acquired under this Act to which he was not entitled, or which was in excess of that to which he was entitled, under the law, under which such allotment or lease was made or granted, then, without prejudice to any other action which may be taken against that person, the managing officer or the managing corporation may, having regard to such principles of assessment or rent as may be specified in this behalf by the Central Government, by order, assess the rent payable in respect of such property and that person shall be liable to pay the rent so assessed for the period for which the property remain or has remained in his possession.
Provided that no such order shall be made without giving to the person concerned a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
(5) Where any person is, or has at any time been, in unauthorised possession of any evacuee property acquired under this Act, the managing officer of the managing corporation may, having regard to such principles of assessment of damages as may be specified in this behalf by the Central Government, assess the damages on account of the use and occupation of such property and may, by order, require that person to pay the damages within such time and in such installment as may be specified in the order :
Provided that no such order shall be made without giving to the person concerned a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Section ” 19 – SYNOPSIS
(1) Claim
(2)Resumption
COMMENTARY
1.Claim–Claimant alleged to have dies in 1954 Sons of the claimant lodging claims for substitution without disclosing the existence of the sisters and the mother Application given by the sisters and the wife dismissed without permitting them to lead evidence regarding the date of death Dismissal of application held to be without jurisdiction. Smt. Raj Rani v. Chief Settl
ement Commissioner, Delhi,1984(2) All India Land Laws Reporter 71.
2.Resumption–Managing Officer on behalf of the President of India entering into an agreement Agreement providing that in the event of default in the payment of any installment the possession of the land could be resumed Only Managing Officer can exercise the power of resumption Chief Settlement Commissioner acting under Section 24 has no authority Order passed by him held to be ultra vires Such an order if confirmed under S. 33 would still be invalid. Manohar Lal v. Financial Commissioner, Haryana,1984(1) All India Land Laws Reporter 52.
–Section 19 Relevant and material question in this dispute is whether the property in dispute is an evacuee estate and consequently does the possession of the appellant, as a displaced person, need be protected As held by the court if the appellant is a tres-passer, even a trespasser can be evicted only by a rightful owner And this title again depends on the question if the property is evacuee property Held Judgment of the authorities below are set aside and remitted the matter to Custodian General for disposal in accordance with law Tehsildar may also be involved as he would be able to collect relevant material from Village Officer to prove the character of property. 1994(2) All India Land Laws Reporter 79
–Section 19 Cancellation of the allotment of land without giving notice to legal heirs of the deceased allottee would be a nullity Under Rule 102, the Managing Officer having passed the order of cancellation against a deed person was a nullity Upholding of the nullity order at the appellate or revisional stage is of no consequence Mandatory requirement of S. 19 and Rule 102 of the Rule were not complied with. 1991(1) All India Land Laws Reporter 418
The Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act,1954
