AMARJIT KAU Vs. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shrimati Amarjit Kaur and others have filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing the orders of the Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings, dated 18th August, 1973, and 7th May, 1971 copies Annexures 'I' and 'J' respectively.

(2.) It is not necessary to state the facts as the main ground urged before me by Mr. H.S. Gujral, learned counsel for the petitioners, is that the order, dated 7th May, 1971, was passed by the Additional Director against Mukhtiar Singh, a dead person and that the same is null and void. According to the learned counsel, without bringing on record the legal representatives of Mukhtiar Singh, no order adverse to the interest of the legal representatives could be passed, irrespective of the fact that one of the co-sharers was present at the time of the hearing of the application.

(3.) After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that there is considerable force in this contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners. It is not disputed that Mukhtiar Singh was one of the respondents in the application that had been filed under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act); that he died prior to the decision of the application by the Additional Director; that his legal representatives, were not brought on the record; that the legal representatives filed Civil Writ Nos. 2177 and 2913 of 1971 in this Court; that in those writ petitions the Bench, on 2nd August, 1971, made an observation that the petitioners should first approach the Additional Director and, thereafter on 14th January, 1972, while dismissing the writ petitions as premature, observed that the petitioners should approach this Court, if so advised, after the decision of the Additional Director on the application put by them for the setting aside of the order, dated 7th May, 1971 on the ground that the same was null and void as it had been passed against a dead person; that the Additional Director, vide his order, dated 18th August, 1973 (copy annexure 'I' to the petition), held that one of the co-sharers was present at the time of the hearing of the application and as such it was not necessary to implead the legal representatives of Mukhtiar Singh deceased and that the petitioners thereafter filed this writ petition calling in question the legality and propriety of the orders, referred to above.