CHANDGI RAM Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition must succeed on the short ground that the Financial Commissioner did not appreciate the true significance of the order of the Commissioner whereby he made recommendations in favour of the petitioner.

(2.) Petitioner is a big landowner. Before consolidation, he had reserved his permissible area. In the meantime, consolidation intervened. The tenant, it appears, was a tenant on an area which was outside the reserved area. He made an application under section 18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, after consolidation, for sale of the land of his tenancy to him by the landlord. The objection of the landowner was that the land sought to be purchased by the tenant was part of his reserved area. The Commissioner was of the view that in view of the altered circumstances, it had to be determined whether the land claimed by the tenant was part of the reserved area of the landlord ? In my opinion, the correct course to adopt, in the circumstances, and which is consistent with the provisions of sections 5 and 24-A of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, and the provisions of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, was that it should be found first whether the tenant was allotted or put in possession of some specified land after consolidation and the landlord was put in possession of certain specified land in lieu of the land held by him minus the tenancy of the respondent. If that had happened, then the landlord will only be entitled to reserved land out of the land allotted to him minus the tenancy land. But if the consolidation authorities have not specifically put the tenant in possession of specified Khasra Numbers and have merely indicated him as a tenant under the landlord, the position would then be that the landlord would be entitled first to reserve his permissible area and the tenant will then be entitled out of the balance to purchase area equivalent to the area held by him as a tenant. As these facts have not been determined and there is no clear written statement filed by the tenant, this is the only course which can be adopted at this stage.

(3.) I would accordingly set aside the order of the Financial Commissioner and all earlier orders leading to that order and direct the Assistant Collector to determine the matter in the light of the observations made above and then decide the application of the tenant under section 18 of the Act. In the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs.