RAJINDER SINGH Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short controversy that has been raised in this writ petition is as to whether respondent Nos. 7 to 13 are the landowners vis-a-vis the petitioner-tenant and on that account how far the order, Annexure P.1, passed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Ferozepur, on April 25, 1961, ordering the ejectment of the petitioner is legal ? To provide the necessary background of the case the following facts deserve to be noticed :

(2.) The petitioner, who was admittedly in cultivating possession of 89 Kanals and 12 Marlas of land as a tenant under respondent Nos. 7 to 13 (hereinafter referred to as the respondents), was sought to be ejected under Section 9(1)(i) of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and for that purpose an application was filed by the respondents in the Court of the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Ferozepur. In the application the respondents had alleged themselves to be 'small landowners competent to eject the tenant-petitioner'. Though the petitioner did not controvert this stand of the respondents in reply to their application under Section 9(1)(i) of the Act, yet at the time of final arguments in the case he did raise a plea that the present respondents though were his landlords, but since they were not landowners, they were not entitled to eject him under the above referred to provision of law. This aspect of the matter has been concluded by the Assistant Collector in his impugned order Annexure P.1 in the following words :-

(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the parties I do not find any substance in the plea of the petitioner. The definition of 'landowner' as given in the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, is in the following words :-