BABA BADRI DASS Vs. DHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Arts. 226/227 of the Constitution of India requires determination of an interesting question of law, making it imperative on us to dig deep in antiquity to discover what are the attributes of a dohli tenure and who is a dohlidar.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this petition the simple and straight :--

(3.) Petitioner Baba Badri Dass, Chela of Baba Narotam Dass Bairagi, concededly is a dohlidar of agricultural land measuring 134 kanals 14 marlas, appropriately described in the petition, situate in village Bahu Akbarpur, Tehsil and District Rohtak, According to him, he succeeded to the property being the chela of Baba Narotam Dass, the erstwhile dohlidar. Vide registered deed dt. 16th May, 1973, (copy Annexure P.1) he leased out the aforesaid parcel of land to respondents No. 1 and 2 for a period of ten years at the annual rent of Rupees 2,000/-. The rent was required to be paid on 15th May of each year. Since the rent was not paid regularly, he filed a petition for ejectment of the lessee/tenants u/s. 9(1) on Form-L of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, (for short the Act) before the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Rohtak. The tenants resisted the claim of the petitioner inter alia on the ground that the petitioner was not a 'landowner' as defined in the Act and, therefore, the petition for ejectment was incompetent. After recording evidence and hearing the respective contentions of the parties, the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Rohtak, allowed the petition ordered the ejectment or respondents Nos. 1 and 2. They unsuccessfully appealed before the Collector, Rohtak. The Commissioner of Ambala Division declined to interfere in the revision petition filed by them. They, thus, moved the Financial Commissioner, Haryana. Shri V. P. Johar, Financial Commissioner, Haryana vide his order dt. 25th Oct. 1979 (copy Annexure P. 2), allowed the petition and dismissed the ejectment application. This order is now impugned in the writ petition. The Motion Bench admitted the petition to a Division Bench and this is how the matter has been placed before us.