LACHHMAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of Civil Writs 3982, 3983, 3984 and 3985 of 1972. The only point involved in these cases is that the petitioners who are alleged to be tenants on the land in dispute, were not heard before the declaration of the surplus areas of their respective landlords. In Harnek Singh and another v. The State of Punjab and others, 1972 1 ILR(P&H) 451, Full Bench of this Court held that transferees from land-holders are entitled to be heard before the surplus area of the landlord is determined. The tenants sitting on land also have valuable right. On a parity of reasoning, they are also entitled to be heard before the surplus area of the landlord is determined. It shall, however be open to the authorities to question the status of petitioners as tenants.

(2.) For the reasons mentioned above, I allow these writ petitions, quash the impugned orders and direct the authorities concerned to hear the petitioners at the time of the determination of the surplus area of the landlords afresh in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.