GIAN CHAND Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VASANDA Ram, the father of the present petitioner was a tenant on agricultural land measuring 120 Kanals 9 marlas. He having died, his three sons viz. the present petitioners stepped into his shoes. They having been ordered to be evicted on account of non payment of rent, the application of respondent Nos. 5 to 8 viz. the landlords was allowed by the Assistant Collector. The appeal and the revision filed by the petitioners having been dismissed, they have approached this Court through the present writ petition. A few facts may be noticed.

(2.) THE petitioners claim to have been tenants for a long time. Prior to the year 1974, they were paying a fixed rent at the rate of Rs. 800/- per year alongwith 2-1/2 maunds of fruit. In 1974, the landlords applied for the fixation of rent at the rate of 1/3rd share of the crop and execution of a lease deed. This application was contested by the petitioners. Ultimately, the claim of the landlords was upheld by the revenue authorities. The writ petition filed by the present petitioners having been dismissed by this Court in Vasandha Ram and Anr. v. The State of Haryana and Ors. 1982 PLJ 453, the petitioners approached the Supreme Court through S. L. P. No. 3854 (C) of 1982. This petition was dismissed by their Lordships on April 14,1982.

(3.) THE petitioners aver that after the dismissal of the Special Leave Petition, the rent became due to the respondent-landlords on June 15, 1983. As there was no agreement with regard to the rate of rent, the petitioners moved a petition under Section 14-A (iii) of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Att, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on June 14,1983 before the Assistant Collector for directions to the landlords to accept the rent and issue the receipt. It was also mentioned in this application that the tenants had requested the revenue authorities to appraise the rent and to fix the amount of rent in accordance with the provisions of Section 17 of the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887. This application was opposed by respondent Nos. 5 to 8. It was dismissed by the Assistant Collector vide order dated March 27, 1984. A copy of this order has been produced by the petitioners as Annexure P-2 with the writ petition.