CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 19177 OF 2007 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: February 01, 2011. Parties Name Lashkar Singh and others ...PETITIONERS VERSUS State of Punjab and others ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg PRESENT: Mr. Y.P.Singla, Advocate, for the petitioners Mr. Manohar Lall, Addl. A.G., Punjab, Mr. Rakesh Chopra, Advocate, for respondent No.6 Jasbir Singh, J. (oral) JUDGMENT CM No. 1559-61 of 2011: C.M. applications are allowed and reply on behalf of respondent No. 6 along with Annexures R-1 to R-4 is taken on record. CWP No. 19177 of 2007: This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash order dated August 12, 2009 (P-11), vide which application of the petitioners for CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 19177 OF 2007 (O&M) -2- restoration of their revision- MR No.3/ 2004, was dismissed. Further challenge was laid to an order dated August 27, 2007, passed by respondent No. 2, vide which revision petition filed by the petitioner was adjourned sine die to await decision of this Court in some pending litigation. Further prayer is to quash the orders passed by the revenue authorities rejecting prayer of the petitioners to restore allotment of the land ,made in favour of their predecessor-in-interest. Reply has been filed, wherein claim made by the petitioners has been controverted. It is not in dispute that during pendency of the proceedings initiated by the petitioners, The Displaced Persons Claims and other Laws Repeal Act, 2005, was passed on September 6, 2005, resulting into repealing of Displaced Persons (Claims) Act, 1950, the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950, the Evacuee Interest (Separation) Act, 1951, the Displaced Persons (Claims) Supplementary Act, 1954. How to deal with the pending cases, a dispute came up before this Court inR.K.Suneja and another v. State of Haryana and others, (CWP No. 9517 of 2008) and the same was disposed of by taking note of communication dated September 22, 2008, addressed by the Ministry of Home Affairs, to the Chief Secretaries of the States of Punjab and Haryana, vide which it was intimated that with a view to remove any ambiguity , which may have been created on account of promulgation of The Displaced Persons Claims and other Laws Repeal Act, 2005, on September 6, 2005, it was ordered that all the pending cases under the Repealed Acts before September 6, 2005, be heard on merits. It was stated as under: CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 19177 OF 2007 (O&M) -3- “...in order to remove ambiguity and doubts which appear to have been created, it is clarified that the encactment of the Displaced Persons and Other Laws Repeal Act, 2005 would not affect disposal of the following categories of cases and the State Government, UTs may, therefore, take action as appropriate, to settle them under the relevant State Laws or the General Clause Act:- 3.1. Unsatisfied verified claims filed under the Displaced Persons (Claims) Act, 1950 in which right has accrued or has been acquired and which were pending as on 6.9.2005 the date on which the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 and other related Acts were repealed. 3.2. Cases in which directions have been issued by the various courts for settlement of claims filed, confirming that an acquired or accrued right exists in favour of the claimant, under Displaced Persons (Claims) Act, 1950. 3.3. Verified claims in which full compensation has not been given so far. 3.4. Appeals and revision / review petitions filed against orders passed by the authorities prescribed under the repealed Acts which are not yet to be disposed off.” The above said writ petition was disposed of on November 10, 2008 and pending dispute in that case was ordered to be revived and CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 19177 OF 2007 (O&M) -4- directions were issued to the concerned officer to hear the same on merits. We feel that the present case is squarely covered by ratio of the judgment in R.K.Suneja's case (supra) In view of above, without adverting to the merits of the case, we allow this writ petition and direct respondent No. 2 to revive application bearing No. MR 3 of 2004 and decide the same in accordance with law by starting the proceedings from the stage at which those were dropped/ adjourned sine die. Liberty remains with the respondents to take all objections, which have been taken in their written-statement before this Court. It is expected that the officer concerned will dispose of the matter expeditiously and preferably within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. ( Jasbir Singh ) Judge (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge February 01, 2011. DKC