PRITAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CIVIL Writs Nos. 1635 of 1962 and 985, 1023 and 1453 of 1953 have been placed before us for consideration whether the Division Bench decision of this court in Bir Singh v. State of Punjab, (1963) 65 Pun LR 961: (AIR 1964 Punj 30), is correctly decided. In case, it is held that the decision in Bir Singn's case (1963)65 Pun LR 961: (AIR 1964 Punj 30) is correct, it is not disputed that Civil Writs nos. 1635 of 1962 and 985, 1023 and 1453 of 1963 would fail. In Civil Writs Nos. 14 and 616 of 1964, besides the question referred for our decision, two additional matters are raised. Our decision will only conclude the point, which is the subject-matter of the reference. But these two petitions will go back to the learned Single judge for decision of the additional matters which require determination.

(2.) IN order to appreciate the controversy, it will be proper to set out the facts of civil Writ No. 1453 of 1963. It is not necessary to advert to the facts of the other petitions. On the 26th September, 1956, the land-holder executed gift deeds of part of his land in favour of his sons and daughters. The mutations on the basis of these deeds were entered on the 28th September, 1956. The mutations were sanctioned on the 4th October, 1956. It is common ground that at the time when these gifts were made, there was no law which, in any manner, affected their validity or which could or did stand in the way of the donees becoming the absolute owners of the land gifted to them. The Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural lands Act (Act No. 13 of 1955) hereinafter referred to as the Act received the assent of the President on the 4th March, 1955 and was published in the Patiala and East Punjab States Union gazette (Extraordinary) of that very date. Certain provisions came into force on the 6th March, 1955 and others later on. The Act was enacted, as the preamble denotes, to amend and consolidate the law relating to the tenancies of agricultural lands and to provide for certain measures of land reforms. This Act has been amended from time to time and we are only concerned with a few of them. One of them is the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural lands Second Amendment Act 15 of 1956. This amendment added Chapter IV-A to the original Act. This chapter is headed "ceiling on land and acquisition and disposal of surplus areas. " Before this amendment, there was no provision for a ceiling on land nor was there a provision with regard to surplus area or for the vesting of the surplus area in the State Government. The Pepsu Tenancy and agricultural Lands Act 13 of 1955 prescribed a 'permissible limit' for the purposes of the Act. The 'permissible limit' was 30 standard acres and where 30 standard acres, on being converted into ordinary acres, exceeded 60 acres --such 60 acres. There were two provisos to the permissible limit and it is not necessary for our purposes to notice them. This Act only safeguarded the rights of the tenants so far as their eviction was concerned. It further conferred certain benefits on the tenants, the most important of which was that the tenant could acquire his holding by payment of compensation to the landlord, to be determined and to be paid in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

(3.) THE provisions of Chapter 4-A, which need be noticed for our purposes, are contained in Section 32-A, which places a ceiling on the holding of a land owner or of a tenant, the ceiling being the total land held by such land owner or tenant which did not exceed in the aggregate the permissible limit. The permissible limit is fixed by Section 3 as 30 standard acres which if converted into ordinary acres exceeds 80 acres--such 80 acres. In the case of a displaced person, who has been allotted land in excess of 30 standard acres, the permissible limit was 40 standard acres and on being converted into ordinary acres 100 acres.