REHMAT MASIH Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER TAXATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has assailed the order of the Financial Commissioner, Taxation, Punjab dated June 5, 1980, affirming on revision the order of the Additional Commissioner, Jullundur Division, Jullundur dated November 9, 1977, in this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) THE facts lie in narrow compass. The petitioner purchased land measuring 168 Kanals 5 Marias situated in village Baddowal, Tebsil Batala, District. Gurdaspur vide registered sale deed dated June, 13, 1953, from respondent No. 5 Dewan Kanwal Krishan. He also purchased land measuring 44 Kanals ) Maria from respondents 6 to 9, namely, Surat Singh, Santckh Singh, Chanan Singh and Naranjan Singh sons of Arur Singh vide registered sale deed dated March 18, 1957. This land was earlier purchased by respondents No. 6 to 9 from respondent No. 5. Surplus area of Dewan Kanwal Krishan was decided by the Collector, Batala vide order dated December 30, 1960. The petitioner was not issued any notice by the Collector Agrarian before determining the surplus area of Dewan Kanwal Krishan. Surplus land was sought to be utilised under the Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972 (for short, the 1972 Act ). Notice was issued to the petitioner. He filed objections to the notice, but the same were rejected by the Collector, Batala vide his order dated January 30, 1975. This order was affirmed in appeal vide order dated November 9, 1977 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Jullundur Division, Jullundur. The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the same in revision petition before the Financial Commissioner, Taxation, Punjab. It was submitted before the Financial Commissioner, Taxation, Punjab that no notice was issued to the petitioner before determining the surplus area of Dewan Kanwal Krishan. It was further submitted that all the proceedings after the decision of the surplus area case would be rendered null and void for want of notice to the petitioner. It is no more in dispute that the vendee from the landowner has to be afforded opportunity of hearing before determining the surplus area case of the landowner. The petitioner had purchased the land from Dewan Kanwal Krishaft much prior to the enforcement of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act and some land on March 18, 1957, much before the decision of the surplus area case of Dewan Kanwal Krishan, The Financial Commissioner, Taxation, Punjab, disposed of the submissions observing thus :

(3.) FOR the reasons stated above, the petition succeeds and the impugned orders of the Collector, Batala, the Additional Commissioner, Jullundur Division, Jullundur and the Financial Commissioner, Taxation, Punjab, dated March 6, 1967, November 9, 1977 and June 5, 1980, respectively, are quashed. The order of the Collector, Batala, dated December 30, 1960, determining the surplus area of Dewan Kanwal Krishan, respondent No. 5, is also quashed. It is, however, left open to the authorities to determine the surplus area of the landowner in accordance with law, No. costs.