HET RAM Vs. ASSISTANT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Het Ram and others have filed this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, restraining the respondents from interfering with their ownership and possession over the land which has been purchased by them under Section 18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) The only contention that has been raised before me by Mr. Gujral, learned counsel for the petitioners, is that the land in dispute having been purchased by the petitioners under Section 18 of the Act, could not legally be utilised for settling the tenants under Section 10-A of the Act after treating it to be the surplus area of the original landowner.

(3.) In spite of service no one appears on behalf of the respondents. However, written statement in the shape of an affidavit has been filed by Shri Aridala, Under Secretary to Government, Punjab, Revenue Department. From the averments made in the written statement it is clear that the revenue authorities are ignoring the purchase made by the petitioners under Section 18 of the Act on the ground that they had come on the land in dispute as tenants in 1954, that is, after the 15th April, 1953, and that such land could legally be utilised as surplus area.