GURCHARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners, in the present petition filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, is that the Special Collector has erred in declaring 37 Standard Acres 14 Units of land as surplus. The case of the petitioner is that at the date, when the land was declared surplus, he was not the owner of the land. He had gifted the same to his grandsons and daughter-in-law, petitioner Nos. 1 to 4. These gifts would be valid in view of my decision in Bhalle Ram and others v. The State of Punjab and others,1962 PunLR 331. In that case, the matter was discussed threadbare and it is not disputed by the learned counsel for State that decision, if applicable, would conclude the matter. The contention of the learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, is that by reason of the amendment of section 19-B by the Punjab Security of Land Tenures (Amendment and Validation) Act (No. 14 of 1962), the effect of the decision has been taken away. The short reply by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that this section has been made operative with effect from the 30th of July, 1958, and he has invited my attention to section 6 read with section 1, sub-clause (2) of the 1962 Act. The relevant sections are reproduced below for facility of reference :-

(2.) In this view of the matter, I allow this petition, quash the order of the Special Collector and the subsequent orders in appeal and revision declaring 37 Standard Acres 14 Units of land as surplus. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.