GURDAS RAM Vs. CHIEF SALES COMMISSIONER, HOSHIARPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has assailed the order of the Chief Sales Commissioner, Hoshiarpur dated April 22, 1980 rejecting his revision petition against the order of transfer of the disputed land to respondent No. 4 dated October 4, 1978 passed by the Sales Commissioner, (Sub Divisional Officer Civil), Garhshankar, in this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) Facts first :-

(3.) Facts as stated above have not been controverted. Respondent No. 4 failed in his challenge to the restricted auction sale in favour of the petitioner before the Chief Sales Commissioner, Punjab, who not only rejected all the objections to the auction sale but also gave a positive finding that respondent No. 4 had already purchased 26 Kanals 4 Marlas of land and could not be treated as landless and thus was ineligible to participate in the auction proceedings. Respondent No. 4 in his application for transfer of the disputed land on the ground of continuous possession did not array the petitioner as party respondent in that petition. The petitioner was also not made party respondent in the appeals or revisions preferred by respondent No. 4 against the order of the Tehsildar (Sales) rejecting his claim for transfer of the disputed land. Sales Commissioner, Garhshankar by his order dated October 4, 1978 accepted the appeal against the order of the Tehsildar (Sales), Hoshiarpur dated November 22, 1974 and the petitioner was not made a party to this appeal. Aggrieved against this order, the petitioner moved the Chief Sales Commissioner. The Chief Sales Commissioner did not understand the true scope and import of the order of his predecessor dated September 27, 1977 passed in revision against the order of the Settlement Officer (Sales) dated November 7, 1975. The Chief Settlement Officer in his order dated September 27, 1977 held thus :-