CHARAN SINGH ETC versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ETC.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R. 243 · Decided: 27-11-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

CHARAN SINGH ETC. 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ETC. 
NOVEMBER 27, 1996 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.T. NANA VAT!, JJ.] 
Nazool Land Rules, 1956 : 
Government land-Grant to appellants-Scheduled Castes--lease of 
uncultivable waste land for ten years-Expiry of lease-Appellants reclaimed 
the land and also set up tube-wells and cultivated the land-Appellants 
remained in possession after expiry of lease-£victio11 proceedings-Order of 
eviction upheld by High Cowt-Appeal-Contention that instead of treating 
the appellants as unauthorised occupant, he should be deemed to have been 
assigned the land as per the Nazool Land Rules, 1956-Held, the Government 
A 
B 
c 
was not justified in taking eviction proceedings in view of the facts and D 
circumstances of the case-The appellants having b,een inducted into posses-
sion reclaimed the land and remained in possession after the expiry of the 
lease, the Government is required to regularise their possession and assign the 
lands in their possession in accordance with its policy-Direction issued to 
authorities to regularise possession of appellants with necessary condi-
tions-Vie appellants shall remain in possession until the regularisation is 
done and shall enjoy the lands without any sub-letting or alienation thereof 
Constitution of India, 1950 : Articles 38, 39(b) and 46. 
E 
Economic and Social Justice-Duty of State to render-Protection of F 
weaker section of society and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes from 
exploitation. 
Murlidhar Dayandeo Kesekar v. Vishwanath Pandu Barde & Anr., 
[1995] Supp. 2 SCC 549 and R. Chandevarappa and Ors. v. State of 
Kamataka and Ors., [1995] 6 SCC 309, referred to. 
G 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 15402 of 
1996 Etc. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 9.12.93 of the Punjab & 
Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 171of1985. 
H 
243 
244 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R. 
A 
V.C. Mahajan, P.N. Puri, Rajiv Garg, N.D. Garg, A.S. Chahil, Ms. S. 
B 
c 
J anani and Manoj Swamp for the appearing parties. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Substitution allowed. 
Leave granted. We have heard learned c~unsel on both sides. 
The facts in appeal arising out of SLP (C) N<:>. 8269/94 are sufficient 
for disposal of all the matters by common judgment. 
The appellant-Charan Singh, a member of the Scheduled Castes, was 
granted 55 Kanals 15 Marlas of the land situated in the revenue estate of 
Katkopa in Faridkot District of Punjab State as per the policy. It is now 
not in dispute that in 1962, he was granted lease of uncultivable waste land 
and he reclaimed the land and also set up tube-well and was cultivating 
D the land. The said lease expired in 1972. Thereafter, he was found to be in 
unauthorised occupation of such land. Action was taken for his eviction. 
He challenged the action in various proceedings. Ultimately, in the im-
pugned order it was held that since he was a lessee and the lease stood 
expired by efflux of time, he had no right to remain in possession thereof. 
E Accordingly, the order of eviction was upheld by the High Court. 
Shri V.C. Mahajan, learned senior counsel for the appellant, con-
tends that since the appellant is a member .of Scheduled Castes the 
Government had allotted the and which originally belonged to Maharaja 
of Faridkot; a vast extent of land was found in possession of Maharaja of 
F 
which 38,000 was taken from Maharaja and 20159 kanal, 2 marlas was 
converted into nazool land; the Government had taken a decision to allot 
this nazool land to the members of the Scheduled Castes. He placed before 
us the relevant proceedings issued by the Government in that behalf. We 
find from the proceedings and orders made from time to time that either 
the· nazool land or the Government surplus land was directed to be 
G assigned initially to the Co-operative Societies composed of members of 
Scheduled Castes and later it was relaxed in favour of the individual 
members. It is, therefore, contended by Shri Mahajan that instead of 
treating the appellant as unauthorised occupant, he should be deemed to 
have been assigned the land as per the Nazool Land Rules, 1956 then in 
H vogue. Instead, the appellant was sought to be evicted. Therefore, the 
CHARANSINGHv. STATE 
245 
action taken by the respondent-Government is not correct in law. Shri A 
Manoj Swamp, learned counsel for the State, contends that the land was, 
though assigned for 10 year;, the Government land. The Government has

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.