KAMAL DEV Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of C.W. No. 675 of 1964 and C.W. No. 676 of 1964 both of which arise out of the same order passed by Shri A.L. Fletcher, Financial Commissioner Punjab, Chandigarh, and are between the same parties.

(2.) 91 Kanals and 2 Marlas of land situated at Hansi in District Hissar belonging to Kamal Dev, petitioner (hereinafter called the landlord) were in possession of Maman, respondent No. 3 (hereinafter called the tenant) as a tenant. On January 27, 1960 the tenant submitted an application to the Assistant Collector, Bhiwani under Section 18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act 10 of 1953 (hereinafter called the Act) for the purchase of the entire land comprised in his leasehold on the ground that he had been in -continuous occupation of the land in question for the requisite number of years. It is somewhat curious that though the land was in Hansi and there was admittedly an Assistant Collector at Hansi, this petition was made before the authority at Bhiwani. On June 1, 1960 the landlord submitted a petition under Section 14-A(1) of the Act for the ejectment of the tenant on, inter alia, the ground that the tenant had failed to pay rent regularly without sufficient cause and that the tenant was in arrears with effect from the Kharif 1959 season i.e. the tenant had not paid rent due on 15th of December, 1959 and thereafter. In his written statement dated 26.7.1960 in reply to the tenant's petition for purchase the landlord stated in paragraphs 12 and 13 thereof that he had already filed a petition for ejectment of the tenant and gave particulars of the same. By order dated 20.2.1961, however, the Assistant Collector, Bhiwani partly allowed the tenant's petition and held that he was entitled to purchase 87 Kanals and 2 Marlas of land out of his total leasehold of 91 Kanals 2 Marlas on payment of Rs. 8,655. The claim for the purchase of the remaining four Kanals of land was rejected by the Assistant Collector. In the parallel proceedings started by the landlord the Assistant Collector, Hansi, by an order dated 13.3.1961 held that the question of the ejectment of the tenant from the land in question did not arise as he had been allowed to purchase it by the Assistant Collector, Bhiwani by the latter's order dated February 20, 1961. The petitioner preferred appeals against the respective orders of both the Assistant Collectors. Both these appeals were dismissed by the Collector concerned by an order of which annexure 'B' attached to each of the petitions is a copy. Thereupon the landlord filed petitions for revision against the order of the Collector before the Commissioner. A copy of the revision petition dated 2.11.1961 against the order under Section 18 of the Act has been filed as annexure 'C' to C.W. No. 676 of 1964. Shri Damodar Dass, I.A.S., Additional Commissioner, Ambala Division, before whom the matter came up for hearing passed an order dated 26.4.1963 (annexure 'C' to C.W. No. 675 of 1964) in the ejectment case. While recommending the landlord's petition for acceptance to the Financial Commissioner it was observed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Ambala Division, as below :

(3.) When the above-said recommendation made by the Additional Commissioner, Ambala Division reached the Financial Commissioner, he was pleased to call for the other revision petition of the landlord which had been kept pending before the Commissioner to await the decision on his above-said recommendation. This appears to have been done with the consent of the parties. When the two revision petitions of the landlord were before the Financial Commissioner he rejected them both by his order dated January 21, 1964 of which annexure 'D' to the writ petition is a copy in the two cases. He rejected the reference which had been made to him by the Additional Commissioner and also dismissed the other revision petition of the landlord. Mr. A.L. Fletcher, the learned Financial Commissioner observed in his said order, which has been impugned before me by the landlord in each of these two cases, inter alia, as below :-