STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Vs. SANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SANT Singh Respondent owned 35.05 standard acres or land situate in village Attlan, District Bhatinda. On 12th(sic) September 1954, he got entered a report in the roznamcha of the Patwari 10 the effect that he had gitted 13 Bighas and 18 Biswas of land in favour of his wife. The Assistant Collector Agrarian issued him draft statement in Form No. 8 of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act; 1955, and after in inquiry, on August 22, 1961 declared 162 standard acres out of his holding as surplus. Sant Singh represented to the Agrarian authorities against this order bringing to their notice the report dated September 17, 1954 pertaining to the gift. He further represented that the mutation entered on the basis of that report had been wrongly rejected by the revenue officers in the absence of the parties. Relying on an unreported decision of this Court in Ranjit Singh and Ors. v. The State of Punjab etc., 1963 C.W.N 721 of Civil Writ No. 721 of 1963, decided by I.D. Dua and Jindra Lal JJ. on November 5, 1963. The Collector Bhatinda District submitted the case of Sant Singh to the Commissioner Patiala Division for review. The learned Commissioner vide his order dated January 28, 1969 sent the case back to the Collector, Bhatinda for ascertaining if the possession of the land bad been actually transferred in the name of the donee as mentioned in the report, before August 21, 1956. The Collector in his turn made a report "that transfer in favour of his (land -owner's) wife did not take place on the scot. Actually the possession was not transferred before August 2l, 1956, according to revenue record." The Commissioner, Patiala Division, vide his orders dated July 15, 1969 did not accept the gift of Sant Singh Respondent in favour of his wife on the ground that from the record he failed to prove the delivery of possession to the donee before August 21, 1956. He did not follow the decision in Ranjit Singh's case (supra) as in his view it did not decide the factum of delivery of possession but only concerned about the disruption of the joint Hindu Family property.

(2.) SANT Singh filed civil Writ No. 2920 of 1969, in this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the orders of the Collector Agrarian declaring 1.6 standard acres of his land as surplus and also the order of the Commissioner of Patiala Division. The learned Single Judge of this Court referring to Ranjit Singh case observed that it only determined the question of the disruption of the Joint Hindu family property on separation of the shares of if members on partition and that this consideration could not be applied to the case of gifts. The learned Single Judge further observed:

(3.) IN the case in hand the revenue authorities upto the Commissioner arrived at a finding that possession of 13 Bighas 18 Biswas of land had not been physically delivered to the donee The Respondent did not place any material on the file of the Writ petition to prove that the findings of the revenue authorities were against the records or otherwise were so erroneous as to require interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India . The Respondent after the finding against him. did not even allege in the petition that he had actually parted with the possession of this property in favour of his wife on 17th September, 1954, when he made the report to the Patwati. He simply stated in Para 2 of his writ petition -