DHARAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of CWP Nos. 5935/1985, 12, 13, 14 and 314/1986 as a common question of law is involved in them.

(2.) In CWP No. 5935/1985, the facts are that one Kabaz was shown as the owner of the land situate in village Mowana, Tehsil Safidon, District Jind, in the Records of Rights. A civil suit was filed by Dharam Singh and Smt. Gango, petitioners, who are son and wife, respectively, of Kabaz, for a declaration to the effect that they were the owners of 1/6th shares each of the land standing of the name of Kabaz. The suit was decree by Sub-Judge, Kaithal, vide judgment and decree dated 26th February, 1959. Mutation No. 1551, dated 1st September, 1960 (Annexure P1) was also sanctioned and duly recorded, incorporating the effect of the said decree. This mutation was also reflected in the Jamabandi for the year 1959-60. The Collector Agrarian (respondent No. 2) vide order dated 26th August, 1960 (Annexure P2) declared that 28.17 Standard Acrs of land in the hands of Kabaz was surplus. After consolidation of holdings in the village, a fresh order dated 30th November, 1961 (Annexure P3) was passed by respondent No. 2 to the effect that 13 SA of land, after consolidation, in the hands of Kabaz was surplus. The grievance of the petitioners is that 2/6th share of the land standing in the name of Kabaz of which they had been declared the owners by the Civil Court vide decree dated 26th February, 1959, was taken into account by respondent No. 2, and 13 SA of area out of the same was declared surplus by respondent No. 2 vide order Annexure P3 without affording them any opportunity of hearing. They, thus, contended that qua them, the orders P.2 and P.3 with regard to declaration of surplus area in the hands of Kabaz are non-est and ineffective.

(3.) In CWP No. 12/1986, the facts are that the agricultural land in dispute in Village Mowana, Tehsil Safidon, District Jind, stood in the name of Bani Singh which, the petitioners allege, was, in fact, jointly owned by them and Bani Singh, Krishan Singh and Madan Singh, petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, are the son, and petitioner No. 3 Vidyawati is the wife of Bani Singh. They filed a civil suit for a declaration to the effect that they were the owners of 3/8th share of the land in dispute standing in the name of Bani Singh which was decreed by Sub-Judge, Kaithal, vide judgment and decree dated 26th February, 1959. The effect of this decree was incorporated in Mutation No. 1548, dated 1st September, 1960 (Annexure P1). This mutation was also reflected in the Jamabandi for the year 1959-60. Collector Agrarian, Kaithal (respondent No. 2), vide order dated 26th August, 1960 (Annexure P2) declared that out of the total land of which Bani Singh was shown the owner, 89. 89 SA of land was surplus. After consolidation of holdings in the village, respondent No. 2 passed a fresh order dated 28th November, 1961 (Annexure P3) declaring that 68.40 SA of land in the hands of Bani Singh was surplus. The grievance of the petitioners is that while declaring the land surplus in the hands of Bani Singh vide orders P.2 and P.3 respondent No. 2 had taken into account the 3/8th share of the land in question of which they had been declared the owners by decree dated 26th February, 1959, without affording them any opportunity of hearing. They, thus, contend that the impugned orders P.2 and P.3 qua them are ineffective and non-est.