VISHNU BHAGWAN Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is for quashing the order of the Financial Commissioner, Annexure P-3.

(2.) Briefly put, the petitioner filed an application under section 7-A of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act seeking eviction of respondent No. 4. The order of eviction was passed by Assistant Collector I Grade on 29.8.1974. No appeal was filed against this order. The petitioner with a view to execute order dated 9.8.1974 filed an execution application in the Court of Assistant Collector I Grade, Narnaul, who vide order dated 7.5.1975 ordered that the decree dated 29.8.1974 be executed forthwith. Respondent No. 4 challenged this order of the Court by way of appeal but the same was dismissed by the Collector, vide order dated 3.8.1976-Annexure P-1. Feeling dissatisfied with the order of the Collector, respondent No.4 preferred a revision-petition which was allowed, vide order dated 18.10.1979 Annexure P-3. The petitioner has assailed the legality and propriety of the order of the Financial Commissioner, Annexure P-3, primarily, on the ground that order of the Assistant Collector I Grade dated 29.8.1974 had become final between the parties and was not subject-matter of the revision-petition and this way, the Financial Commissioner travelled beyond the ambit of his powers thereby setting aside the binding order between the parties even when the same was not under challenge.

(3.) Argument though attractive is in fact without any substance. It is the admitted case of the parties that eviction under section 7-A of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act was filed after coming into force of the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972. There is no averment in the writ petition to the effect that the area owned by and held by the petitioner does not exceed the permissible area in terms of section 4 of the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972. Section 33 of the Act declares such provisions of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 and the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955 which are inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, that is to say, before a relief can be granted to a person under section 7-A of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, the authorities have specifically come to a finding that such ejectment also satisfy the provisions of the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972. There is no material on Land Holdings Act, 1972. There is no material on record by which it can be inferred that the petitioners also satisfy the test as prescribed under the Ceiling Act. For reasons best known to the petitioners, the order of the Assistant Collector I Grade dated 29.8.1974 which had been adversely commented by the Financial Commissioner while accepting the revision-petition of respondent No.4 has not been placed in record. During the course of arguments, counsel, however, verbally referred to the same in support of his contentions. Counsel when specifically asked whether there is any discussion in the order dated 29.8.1974 with regard to the holding of the petitioners, vis-a-vis the provisions of the Ceiling Act, admitted that the Assistant Collector I Grade has not examined the matter from this angle. On the contrary, the following observations of the Financial Commissioner on this aspect are clear: