S BALWANT SINGH CHOPRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOR the limited purpose of this referring order, the facts are in a narrow compass. Four connected Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 2775, 693, 1284 and 1285 of 1966 came for decision before Tuli, J. As common questions of law arose, these were disposed of by a Single Judgment against which the present four Letters patent Appeals are directed.

(2.) THE first question of law considered was whether after the reorganisation of the state of Punjab, the landowner owning the land in the States of Punjab and haryana could claim that they should be allowed the permissible area in both the states separately and the order declaring the area surplus prior to 1st November, 1966, which has not been utilised so far should be deemed to have no effect. The second question agitated in Civil Writ No. 2775 of 1966 was whether under Rule 6 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Rules, 1956, the transferees of the land are entitled to a notice and hearing in proceedings for determination of the surplus area. The learned Single Judge held that the petitioners were not entitled to claim their permissible area in each of the two States of Punjab and Haryana as they now exist. regarding the second point it was held that the transferees were not entitled to any hearing and notice.

(3.) ON behalf of the appellants, as regards the second contention regarding the right of the transferees to notice and a hearing primary reliance is placed on sub-clauses (3), (5) and (6) of Rule 6 of the Rules. These are in the following terms :--