Since proprietary rights had before hand been obtained by the appellant of the entire allotted area and the Managing Officer had numberjurisdiction to cancel allotment until proprietary rights were set aside, reference was made to the Chief Settlement Commissioner to exercise powers under Section 24 of the Displaced Persons Compensation and Rehabilitation Act, 1954 to cancel the proprietary rights to the extent of the excess allotment.
Permitting the appellant to retain the allotment due to Ladha Singh son of Ganpat Singh, it was proposed to cancel the allotment representing the land belonging to Ladha Singh son of Sant Singh.
This appeal by special leave is virtually against the decision of a learned single Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which was affirmed by the Letters Patent Bench by a limine order of dismissal.
The appellant claimed that Ladha Singh son of Ganpat Singh and Ladha Singh son of Sant Singh was one and the same person.
It appears that Ladha Singh had claimed allotment of land far in excess than was due to him.
The Managing Officer differed from that view.
