RANJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ranjit Singh petitioner owns land in village Meean, Tehsil and District Bhatinda. His surplus area case was finalised by the Collector Agrarian, Bhatinda, vide order dated 10th June, 1976 (P1). The Collector Agrarian, Bhatinda during verification detected that the petitioner had been wrongly given the benefit of sale of his land, which had been effected at the low rate of Rs. 2000/- per acre. He sought permission of the Commissioner to review the order of the Collector Agrarian already passed, whereby the surplus area case of the petitioner had been finalised. The Commissioner granted the permission to the Collector vide order dated 16th March, 1983 (P3), which reads :

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has not been afforded an opportunity of hearing by the Commissioner before he granted permission to the Collector to review the earlier order of Collector Agrarian, whereby the surplus area case of the petitioner had been finalised. The impugned order (P3) is liable to be quashed. The contention is without merit. A similar contention was raised in C.W.P. No. 1162 of 1983 (Sohan Muni v. The State of Punjab and others) decided on 11th April, 1983, and the Division Bench made the following observations in the context thereto :

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the impugned order involved threat to the civil rights of the petitioner and further it was quasi judicial in nature. The petitioner, therefore, had a right to be heard before it was passed. This contention is also without merit. The observations of the Division Bench, reproduced above, are a complete answer to this contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner.