1994 PLP 1809 (CLC)

Syed Jamshed Ali and Syed Mansoor Ali for Respondent No.13. Respondent No. 18 in person. Date of hearing: 10th November, 1992. This appeal under section 4(4) of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958 is directed against the order dated 23‑10‑1968 passed by the Settlement Commissioner with the powers of Chief Setttlement Commissioner through which the /application moved by the applicant seeking delcaration that the properties in dispute bearing No.SE‑36 R‑140 and No.SE‑36‑R‑142 were evacuee trust properties has been rejected.

2. I have examined the record with the assistance of the learned counsel for both the parties and the impugned order. It is an admitted fact that both A the properties were owned by Victoria Diamond Jubilee Hindu Technical Institute which was a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act (21 of 1860)

3. Learned counsel for respondent No.13 frankly admitted that the said Society was an educational institution as per its Memorandum of Association. The Settlement Commissioner was influenced by the fact that the properties had been assessed for the purpose of property tax, therefore, the same was not trust property because the property tax could not be assessed regarding trust properties.

4. I am afraid the reasonings on the basis of which the Settlement Commissioner proceeded to hold that the properties in dispute though owned by an educational institution still formed part of compensation pool constituted under the Act, are not tenable. Under subsection (2) of section 4 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958, any immovable property attached to an educational institution did not form part of the compensation pool. The properties in dispute stood excluded from the compensation pool merely because they were owned by an educational institution. It may be observed here that it was admitted by the respondents in their written arguments filed before the Settlement Commissioner in this case which are present on the record that certain portions of the 'said properties had been rented out by the said Institution to khalsa Printing Press and Khosla Brothers and even to private persons from whom the Institution had been charging the rent. It may be on account of the reason that the Institution was deriving financial benefits/income that the Taxation Department assessed the same for the purpose of property tax. This fact did not detract from the validity of general declaration made under subsection (2) of section 4 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation. and Rehabilitation) Act; 1958, that such a property nevertheless would not form compensation pool on account of its having been attached to educational institution.

5. The order passed by the Settlement Commissioner dated 23‑10‑1968 is f4not sustainable. This appeal is accepted. The impugned order dated 23‑10‑1968 is set aside and the application filed by the petitioner is accepted and it is declared that both the properties did not form part of compensation pool and are evacuee trust properties.

6. Learned counsel .for respondent No.13 submitted that the said respondent was issued PTD long before the date fixed under section 10(2) of the Evacuee Trust Properties (Management and Disposal) Act, 1975, therefore, his transfer should be validated and kept intact and the, evacuee Property Trust Board should recover transfer price paid by the said respondent from the Settlement Department. Respondent No.13 and any other respondent may seek remedy by making application to the Evacuee Trust Board under section 10(2) of 'the said Act, which shall be disposed of in accordance with law and if any order is passed of which the transferee would feel aggrieved he may seek remedy in accordance with law. There will be no order as to costs: A.R.K./E.26/L Appeal accepted.