(Per : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN) We find no error in the view taken by the Learned Single Judge.
Land was granted to father of respondents No. 4 and 5 on 16.8.1967. Condition No.5 of the original order of grant stipulated that the land being of new tenure could not be alienated either by way of mortgage, sale or gift or in any other manner whatsoever. In violation of such stipulation, land was transferred in favour of respondent No.3 on 6.3.1996. Deputy Collector issued suo motu notice and ordered forfeiture of the land directing vesting of the same in the Government on the ground that same was transferred unauthorizedly.
The petitioner stated that he had purchased the property from respondent No.3 on 7.6.1976 and therefore, he should have been heard before cancellation of grant of land.
Learned Single Judge took the view that on 6.3.1996, the petitioner had no interest in the property and there was violation of condition stipulated in the original order of grant.
We find no error in the findings of the Learned Single Judge.
Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that he may be permitted to make an application for regularization on payment of requisite price and premium on basis of circular dated 11.3.1996.
The petitioner may make such application. On receipt of such an application, the Collector shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Appeal as well as Civil Application stands disposed of accordingly.
Direct service is permitted.
(K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,C.J.) (AKIL KURESHI,J.) (raghu) Top