KARNAIL SINGH Vs. MAGISTRATE, 1ST CLASS AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question, which falls for decision in this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is whether a person, who is recorded in the khasra girdawari as "gair maurusi", can be treated without any other evidence to He a tenant -at -will or a lessee holding a tenancy within the meaning of Clause (1) of Sub -section (5) of Section 6 of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1952 (Punjab Act No. IV of 1953) (hereinafter called the Act) so as to disentitle him to stand for election as, or continue to be, a Sarpanch or Panch of a Panchayat in the Punjab.

(2.) THE facts leading to the filing of this writ petition lie in a very narrow compass. Nomination papers for election to the office of Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat of Rurkee Mughlan were filed on January, 1 1964, by the Petitioner as well as by Gurdial Singh and Darshan Singh, Respondents 2 and 3. The Petitioner's nomination tiff Missing page no. 848 and 849

(3.) WHICH capacity the Petitioner is occupying the land. The cultivation column shows Karnail Singh, Petitioner, along with others to be in cultivating possession of khasra No. 18/14 of Gram Panchayat in the capacity of tenant. Hence, this issue is also decided in favour of the Respondents." The argument of Mr. Kuldip Singh is that in order to disentitle a candidate to stand for election as a Sarpanch or Panch under the Act on account of the disqualifications referred to in Clause (1) of Sub -section (5) of Section 6, thereof, it is necessary to give a finding to the effect that he is a 'tenant'. He then asserts that the word "tenant" not having been given any special definition in the Act, we have to fall back on the meaning of this expression as ascribed to it in Sub -section (5) of Section 4 of the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887. Relevant part of the said definition is in the following terms: