Civil Writ Petition No.1451 of 2009 :1 : ***** Mohd.Sharif & others Vs. State of Punjab & others Present: Mr.Anil Kumar Garg, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Praveen Chander Goyal, Addl.A.G.Punjab, for the respondents. **** The predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner was owner in possession of land measuring 22 Bighas-6 Biswas in village Sherpur Sodian, Tehsil Malerkotla, District Sangrur. This land was wrongly declared to be an evacuee property on the ground that the owner had shifted to Pakistan. In fact, the petitioners or their predecessor- in-interest had shifted from Malerkotla due to security reasons. This land belonging to the petitioners, as such, was taken over by the Rehabilitation Department and subsequently allotted to others. On 13.5.1992, the petitioners filed a petition under Section 27 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act for restoration of this land. Financial Commissioner, Revenue ultimately directed the Custodian General to locate and allot the land to the petitioners. Copy of this order is annexed with the petition as Annexure P-1. Custodian General, in turn, directed Deputy Commissioner to pass an order in terms of the order dated 13.5.1992 (Annexure P-1). On 11.8.1997, land measuring 37 kanals-7 marlas was allotted to the petitioners by Additional Custodian D.R.O.Sangrur at village Kila Haqima, Tehsil Dhuri, District Sangrur. Direction to issue warrant of possession was Civil Writ Petition No.1451 of 2009 :2 : also made. This land was found to have been encroached and accordingly the petitioners made a representation for allotment of some alternative land. Thereafter the petitioners made various representations for issuance of warrant of possession. The order has, thus, not been complied with and the petitioners are without allotment of any land. Notice of motion was issued. Reply is filed. The factual averments made in the petition are not seriously disputed in the counter affidavit filed. It is conceded that the possession of the allotted land could not be delivered to the petitioners on account of the same being under unauthorised possession of the occupants. The State has expressed its difficulty in further ensuring implementation of the orders on account of the fact that Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 stands repealed. As a result thereof, power with the authorities for allotment of the land under this Act is not available. State, however, has received instructions from Government of India through a letter dated 22.9.2008 requiring the State to consider applications pending as on 5.9.2005. The State Government has accordingly enacted a law to deal with such cases, known as Punjab Package Deals (Disposal) Properties Amendment Bill, 2009. As per the reply, this Bill has been passed by the Legislative Assembly, but is pending for issuance of a Gazette notification. In this background, the State has undertaken to consider the claim of the petitioners in terms of this amended legislation. The inability on the part of the petitioners to act in regard to the prayer made in the petition, thus, can be appreciated. At the Civil Writ Petition No.1451 of 2009 :3 : same time, the right of the petitioners to have their land which stands conceded can also not be forgotten. The petitioners are citizens of this country. They have been made to loose their land because of mistake on the part of the State authorities. This may not be an intentional mistake but is a mistake for which the petitioners cannot be made to suffer. Efforts to rectify the same have failed but the petitioners cannot be left without remedy. Petitioners only have an order of allotment for a solace but have not been given possession. Responsive State, if it is so, can be expected to appreciate the pain and agony of the petitioners in losing their property. The error must be corrected and be corrected fast. The petitioners continue to suffer without any respite in sight. State authorities will do well to allot land to the petitioners immediately and it can do so as it has already taken action to revive such like cases. In another case, a letter issued by Central Government was brought to my notice vide which directions are conveyed that repeal should not effect the disposal of unsatisfied certified claim in which right has accrued or has been acquired and were pending on 6.9.2005. Repeal is also not to effect where directions are issued by various courts for settlement of claims filed conferring that an acquired or accrued right exists in favour of the complainant and also in those cases where verified claim in which full compensation has not been given and where appeals and revision/review petition filed under the Repealed Act are yet to be disposed of. The case of the petitioners seems to be covered under these clauses. Thus, their case would deserve to be attended with priority. After all the petitioners are seeking restoration of their own property. Any delay would entitle the petitioners to claim Civil Writ Petition No.1451 of 2009 :4 : compensation and so a need to expedite the action on the part of the State. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. The petitioners would be at liberty to approach this court if their prayer is not attended to fast in a near future or they are left with any other grievance. April 30, 2009 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE