HARI SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who was a big landowner, surplus area was determined by an order dated July 19, 1963 under the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955. Under said order, the petitioner Hari Singh, was declared as having surplus area of 9-3 standard acres. According to the petitioner, the said surplus area was not utilised and he remained in possession thereof. Subsequently, in the year 1982, notice was affixed on his house directing him to give possession of the surplus area in favour of the State within a period of ten days from the date of notice, namely, June 30, 1982. Petitioner Hari Singh filed this writ petition challenging the said notice, said to have been issued under Section 9 of the Punjab Land Reforms Act.

(2.) THE main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the surplus area under the Punjab Land Reforms Act has not been determined so far and (sic) which has been determined under the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955, Punjab Land Reforms Act, the Government has no power to take possession of the said surplus area until the surplus area of the landowner has been re-determined under the provisions of the Punjab Land Reforms Act.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the State fairly stated that no orders have been passed determining the surplus area of the petitioner under the provisions of the Punjab Land Reforms Act. It is, therefore, to be seen whether the State can take possession of the property which has been declared as surplus under the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955, without redermining the surplus area of the landowner under the provisions of the Punjab Land Reforms Act. It has been held in Nachhatar Singh v. State, 1982 PLJ 232 as follows :-