BARU SINGH MALIK Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are landowners of village Umra, tehsil Hansi, district Hissar. A part of their land was being irrigated previously by the Sunder Distributary of the Western Jamuna Canal. For the purposes of extending the irrigational facilities, the State Government constructed a lift channel known as Dhamana Minor which also received water from Sunder Distributary at RD-157127-R. Lands situate in village Rohnat, Umra and some other villages came to be irrigated from Dhamana Minor as well. Because of the introduction of a new scheme about 2000 additional acres of land situate in villages Umra and Rohnat began to receive water supply.

(2.) On October 25, 1952, statements of objects and reasons for bringing on the statute book the Punjab Betterment Charges and Acreage Rates Act, 1952 (hereinafter called the Act), were published in the official Gazette. It was mentioned that with a view to rehabilitating the agricultural economy of the State, the Government had undertaken the construction of a number of irrigation schemes. This entailed an enormous expenditure and large loans had to be taken. It was felt proper that a levy should also be made on the land-owners who were benefited by these schemes. The levy as restricted to a sum not more than one-half of the difference between the value of the land before any work in connection with the scheme was undertaken and their estimated value after the coming into operation of the scheme. It was also stipulated that in case the expenses incurred on the new schemes were being met from the levies already made, no further levy would be imposed on the land-holders. In this background the Act was brought on the statute book. The relevant provisions of the Statute may now be noticed -

(3.) Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Act were designed to carry out the policy of the Act as indicated above and Section 5-A entitled the State Government to make an advance levy which was subject to adjustment at the time of finalization of the schedule under Section 4 of the Act. A reading of these provisions shows that the executive Government approached its legislative wing with the object of giving legal sanction to a measure which was designed to afford service to the landowners. Under normal circumstances, the executive authority charges the entire costs of the services which it proposes to render under the provisions of a statute but at the time when this Act was sought to be enacted there was a widespread agitation in the entire Punjab. Some of the critics and the opponents of the then ruling party carried on the propaganda that this Act was being brought on the statute book in order to harass the poor farmers of the State. In order to counter this propaganda and to dispel these reactionary feelings, special provisions mentioned in Sections 3, 4 and 5 were incorporated in the Act. In short the executive Government introduced this measure after obtaining a mandate from the legislative wing that the amount realized under the Act would neither be excessive nor would it be realized as revenue to augment the income of the State. In order to ensure that the landowners will not have to pay an exorbitant charge the legislature expressly provided that the levy imposed will not exceed one-half of the increase in the price of the land because of the introduction of the betterment scheme. If the levies already imposed were sufficient to meet the charges of the new scheme, it was stipulated that no further imposition will be made upon the landholders.