KALI RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Kali Ram petitioner No. 1 owned holdings comprised of 51.06 standard acres. The Collector, Karnal, on 21.7.1960 after making an allowance for the mortgaged area, declared 18.55 standard acres as surplus area. Petitioners No. 2 to 5 sons of Kali Ram on 21.6.1960 had obtained a civil decree for the partition of the land with his father. Kali Ram when appeared before Collector, Karnal, had apprised the Collector of that fact as is apparent from his order dated 21.7.1960. The Collector despite the said information did not issue any notice to petitioners 2 to 5 before passing the impugned order. The petitioners 2 to 5 along with his father Kali Ram have impugned the order dated 21.7.1960, inter alia, on the ground that notice to the petitioners 2 to 5 was mandatory as held by the Full Bench of this Court reported as Harnek Singh v. State of Punjab,1972 PunLR 127, and therefore, qua petitioners No. 2 to 5 the said order was inoperative and that they could not be deprived of their holdings which they have secured as a result of the decree.

(2.) Admittedly, before passing of the impugned order dated 21.7.1960, Collector Karnal had issued no notice to petitioners 2 to 5.

(3.) Mr Gopi Chand appearing for the respondent-state has, however, canvassed that the petition is delayed as the order affecting the petitioners was passed on 21.7.1960 but they have approached this Court only in 1983 and he sought support for the same from a single Bench decision of this Court reported as Rajinder Singh and Ors. v. The Financial Commissioner (Revenue) Punjab and Ors., 1979 LLR 316.