SAJJAN SINGH Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Sajjan Singh has moved this Court in certiorari proceedings for declaring the sale of his land in favour of Chhajju Singh, Narain Singh and Dalip Singh (respondents 4 to 6) on 15th of June, 1966, a nullity.

(2.) The petitioner on his own application was made a Sarbrah of Chhajju Singh Lambardar, respondent No. 4, in 1957. Likewise, on his own application the petitioner was made Sarbrah of Lambardars Narain Singh and Dalip Singh, respondents 5 and 6, in 1960. According to the petitioner, the Lambardars of whom he was appointed a Sarbrah had some outstanding dues and he was called upon to make a payment of Rs. 13,509.81. We need not concern ourselves about the merits of the controversy whether the money was actually due from the petitioner, and it will be assumed against him that a sum of Rs. 13,509.81 was actually due to the Government from him on account of land revenue.

(3.) According to the order passed on 24th of July, 1963, by the Collector, Sangrur (Annexure A) the land belonging to the petitioner was attached and taken in sapurdari for a period of five years. Manifestly, it was proposed to realise the dues by farming out the land on lease during this period. Subsequently, it was decided to put the land of the petitioner to auction and the allegation of the petitioner is that this was done behind his back and at the instance of respondents 4 to 6. We may again assume against the petitioner that he knew about the proclamation of sale as his own signatures are appended on this document. According to this proclamation, which is of 3rd of June, 1964, the sale was fixed for 15th of June, 1964. It appears that the bidders in the sale were respondents 4 to 6 and the sale closed in their favour for a sum of Rs. 12,834.24. The sale certificate was granted to respondents 4 to 6 on 22nd of August, 1966 (Annexure B). The petitioner alleges that after this sale certificate had been granted attempts were made to take possession of land and he came to know that it had been sold illegally and unlawfully.