BHAJAN LAL Vs. B S GREWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of four connected writ petitions Nos. 210, 279, 280 281 of and 1970 as the material facts in all these writ petitions are stated to be almost the same. This order is being dictated by reference to the pleadings of the parties in Bhajan Lal V. Financial Commissioner etc., Civil Writ No. 210 of 1970.

(2.) Respondent Nos. 3 and 4, who are in occupation of the land in dispute as tenants, filed applications in December, 1965, under Section 18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (hereinafter briefly referred to as "the Act") for purchase of the lands in their occupation. Shri Bhajan Lal petitioner and his brother, Jagdish Chand (respondent No. 5 in this writ petition) were impleaded as respondents in that application as they were described in the revenue records as transferees of the land from their father Mohan Lal, a displaced person. Mohan Lal who has also been impleaded as respondent No. 6 in this writ petition had been allotted this evacuee land by the Rehabilitation Department. The application filed by Bhajan Lal's sons was allowed by the Assistant Collector by an order dated 29.9.1966 (Annexure 'A' to the petition) on payment of 3/4th of the price of land. The order shows that the petitioner and his brother had raised an objection that they had not been conferred proprietary rights in the evacuee land upto that time and that no application under Section 18 for the purchase of the proprietary rights was competent in view of the provisions of Section 19 of the Act. This objection had not succeeded with the Assistant Collector and appeals filed one after the other by the petitioner and his brother were dismissed by the Collector and the Commissioner, copies of their orders being Annexures 'B' and 'C' respectively. A revision petition filed by these persons before the Financial Commissioner met with some success, however, Shri S.K. Chhibber who held this office at the time observed, inter alia, in his order (Annexure 'D' to the petition) that the petitioners were allottees and admittedly not been given proprietary rights in the land and that the ownership rights continued to vest in the Custodian of Evacuee Property. Section 18 of the Act relating to the right of the tenant to purchase the land was found to be inapplicable to evacuee lands in view of the provisions of Section 19 of the Act. The circumstances that the original allottee Mohan Lal had been dealing with the land as an owner and was shown as such in the revenue records and that he had effected a transfer of the land in favour of his sons were found to fall short of proof of full-fledged ownership of the allottee or his successors-in-interest. Section 19 of the Act was found to create a bar to the purchase of evacuee lands until proprietary rights were conferred on the allottee.

(3.) Shri B.S. Grewal who took over as Financial Commissioner in place of Shri Chhibber was, however, of a different opinion and proceeded to review the order of his predecessor. It is his order dated 6.1.1970 (Annexure 'E' to the petition) which is being impugned by the petitioners. In this order Shri Grewal has observed that the petitioners had raised a purely technical objection which should not normally have succeeded and that it had lost all force in view of the fact that proprietary rights had actually been conferred on the allottee as was mentioned in a communication dated 2nd May, 1967 received from the managing officer. This communication is Annexure 'R1' to the return filed by the respondents. It is mentioned in this communication that the allotment in favour of Shri Mohan Lal had been made permanent and that proprietary rights were to be conferred by Tehsildar, Sirsa.