HARDEVA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of two writ petitions, Civil Writ Nos. 1731 and 1732 of 1962. Such slight differences as exist between the facts of these two petitions relate only to question of fact which are briefly indicated below; the substantial question of law to be decided in both these petitions is identical.

(2.) Hardeva, petitioner is admittedly a big landlord of village Panniwala Mota in Sirsa Tehsil of Hissar District. Two of his tenants made applications on 9th September, 1957, for purchase of the holdings in their occupation under section 18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Surja (respondent No. 4 in C.W. 1731 of 1962), sought permission to purchase land measuring 28 bighas 12 biswas in khasra No. 326-M in village Panniwala Mota while Duni Ram, the fourth respondent in C.W. 1732 of 1962, likewise asked for the purchase of the land measuring 14 bighas comprised in khasra No. 248, also in village Panniwala Mota. These applications were allowed by two separate orders of the Assistant Collector Shri Hoshiar Singh passed on 31st of March, 1959. It was held by the Assistant Collector that the land in question in each case had been in continuous possession of the applicant for the last six years and that it had not been reserved by the landlord under the provisions of the Act. It was further found that the tenants did not possess more than the permissible limits. The tenants were, therefore, permitted to purchase the lands at their market value which was fixed in each case at Rs. 192.74 P. per bigha. Hardeva presented appeals to the Collector before whom the only point Agitated was that the tenants who sought permission to purchase the lands of the big landowner were holding more than the permissible areas. This point was decided against the landlord and in favour of the tenants in both cases by the Collector in two separate appellate orders which were passed on 20th of July, 1960.

(3.) In a petition for revision before the Commissioner, Ambala Division, permission was sought and granted urge the additional ground that the landlord had in fact selected the area which the tenants applied to purchase under section 18 of the Act. It would be recalled that by an amendment introduced in the Act by insertion of section 5-B on 20th of December, 1957, a land-owner who had no till then exercised his right of reservation "may select his permissible area and intimate the selection to the prescribed authority within the period specified in section 5-A in such form and manner as may be prescribed." Under section 5-A, a declaration has to be made about the land in excess of permissible area by a land-owner within six months from the commencement of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures (Amendment) Act, 1957. Prior to the amendment, a land-owner was given similar right of reservation and it seems that section 5-B was inserted for the benefit of those who had not till the 20th of December, 1957, made any reservation. Under the amended section 5-B, the land-owner had included the areas now sought to be purchased in his selection made either on 19th or 20th of June, 1958. It was sought to be argued before the Commissioner that by virtue of a ruling given by he Financial Commissioner and reported in Karam Singh v. Angrez Singh,1960 LLT 57 no distinction was made between reservation and selection. It was stated in this memorandum that previously selection did not rank on the same footing as reservation and the point consequently had not been pressed by the landlord before the Assistant Collector and Collector. Holding that the landlord had raised this point both before the Assistant Collector and the Collector, though not pressed and that in fact the selection had been made by the landlord before the statutory period of six months, a recommendation was made to the Financial Commissioner that the tenants should not be allowed to purchase the lands which had been selected by the landowner under section 5-B of the Act.