RAJA SAHIB OF NALAGARH Vs. PUNJAB STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing the order of Shri B.S. Grewal, Financial Commissioner, Punjab, dated 1710- 1964 has been referred to a larger Bench by my learned brother Tatachari, J. by his order dated 15-11-1967 because it raises the question of the vires of Section 7 of the Punjab Public Premises and Land (Eviction & Rent Recovery) Act, 1959 (Act Xxxi of 1959) (hereafter called the Act). This section has been challenged on the ground that it is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

(2.) Stating briefly the facts giving rise to this challenge the petitioner Raja Sahib of Nalagarh claims to have been a proprietor of the land in dispute situated in villages Seri and Ghansot, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Ambala, before the formation of the Patiala and East Punjab States Union, when the State of Nalagarh merged into the said Union. Later the Pepsu Government, by means of a notification dated 16-7-1955 relinquished the said land in favour of the villagers. As a result of this relinquishment, the land vested in the Panchayats of the villages concerned. On 14-6-1958, one Smt. Ram Payart complained to the Tehsildar that the land was still retained in possession by the petitioner and that his cattle were grazing in the lands. After certain reports by the various Tehsildars, the Commissioner made an order for the recovery of Rs. 2,617.50 Paise as lease money from the petitioner. It is averred in the writ petition that the order was made by the Commissioner on 12-10-196I and a review against the same was dismissed on 5-6-1963. The matter Was taken by the petitioner on revision to the Financial Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner reduced the demand to Rs. 2.000/- because he felt that a part of the land at least had been Utilised by the villagers for grazing their cattle.

(3.) It is in these circumstances that the present writ petition was presented In this Court. It is unnecessary to go minutely into the contents of the writ petition because in 1965, when it was presented to the Punjab High Court, the view which prevailed in that Court was that the Act was constitutional and not violative of either Article 14 or Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution or of the principles of natural justice. This view was taken by a Full Bench of the Punjab High Court in The Northern India Caterers Private Ltd. v. State of Punjab, which decision was reversed on appeal by the Supreme Court in Northern India Caterers Private Ltd. v. State of Punjab, The majority view of the Supreme Court held Section 5 of the Act to be discriminatory and violative of Article 14. Because of the reversal of the decision of the Full Bench of the Punjab High Court, in the present writ petition, an application was made for permission to raise the question of the validity of Section 7 of the Act and the permission having been granted, the case has been referred to a larger Bench as stated above.