BADAN SINGH Vs. THE STATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by a mortgagee of a right -holder calling in question the order of the Assistant Director, Consolidation of Holdings, allowing the appeal of one Gajjan Singh against the right holder under Section 21(4) of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (East Punjab Act No. 50 of 1948).

(2.) THE Petitioner was the mortgagee of Thakar Singh of 101/2 bighas of land. In consolidation Thakar Singh was allotted certain killa numbers. Gajjan Singh's plea was that the land which had been allotted to Thakar Singh should have been allotted to him. This plea prevailed with the Settlement Officer in appeal and the allotment of Thakar Singh was re -fixed and relief was granted to Gajjan Singh. The sole grievance of the mortgagee is that he was not heard by the Settlement Officer when an order was passed whereby the owner's tak was shifted and consequently his mortgage was also shifted from the land which had been originally allotted to the owner. His further grievance is that he moved the Director under Section 42 of the Act and the Director rejected his application on the ground that it did not He. So far as the Act is concerned, a mortgagee has no right to interfere in the allotment of taks as between the owners. His only right is under Section 26 of the Act and that is that his mortgage charge will go on to the tak that is allotted to the right -holder on whose land he is the mortgagee. If his charge has not been properly fixed on the land according to Section 26, he has a right to move the authorities in that behalf. But he has no right to call in question the order of the authorities fixing the taks in between the right -holders or withdrawing one tak from one right -holder and giving it to the other right -holder. In the present petition the Petitioner's only grievance is that the tak allotted to this right -holder should have been withdrawn only after notice to him. This contention is ill -founded. He has no locus standi in the matter.