BRIJ LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) , F.C. - Undisputed facts of the case are that Gajjan Singh landowner, father of the present revision petitioner owned 99.40 acres of land in 1953. He transferred 3/4 share of the total land to his sons in a family partition through a Civil Court decree dated 21.7.1958. He was thus left with about 25 acres of land. The Collector Surplus in Punjab considered his case and declared 38.72 acres of his land as surplus on 31.8.1961. Appeals etc. against the above surplus order of 1961 were dismissed in 1962 and 1963. The land declared surplus remained unutilized till 1980. The petitioners made an application before the Prescribed Authority Dabwali on 3.9.1980 for excluding from the surplus pool the 3/4th area transferred to them before 30.7.1958, as provided under Section 8 of the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972. The Collector, however, vide order dated 12.9.1980, decided to exclude only 28.43 acres of land from the surplus pool and decided that 9.47 acres be utilized under the Utilization Scheme, as surplus area. It is not known on what basis decision to exclude and include the above areas had taken. This 9.47 acres of surplus area was allotted to the respondents vide order dated 14.9.1980. The petitioners thereafter approached the Civil Court and got a decree dated 24.4.1989 setting aside the order dated 31.8.1961. Appeal filed by the State against the above orders was also dismissed on 2.12.1989.

(2.) THEREAFTER the petitioners moved the Prescribed Authority with the request that mutation No. 1839 which has been sanctioned in favour of the State Government should be cancelled and the land in dispute should not be treated as part of the surplus pool. Collector Surplus Area dismissed the aforesaid application vide orders dated 4.7.1995 and the appeal filed before the Commissioner, Hisar Division was also dismissed by him on 16.11.1995. It is against the above order dated 16.11.1995 that this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) UNDISPUTEDLY the land in the hands of Gajjan Singh, as declared surplus in 1961 remained unutilized under the Punjab Act. After the coming into being of the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 lands in excess of the permissible area transferred before 30.7.1958, became protected from being declared surplus on that account and thus could not have got vested in the State Govt. for being utilized under the 1972 Act. A simple reading of Section 8(1) and Section 12(3) of the 1972 Act brings out the above position which has also been upheld in various decisions of the High Court. The same point has been repeated in the Instructions issued by the Haryana Govt. vide letter dated 29.10.1976 which stand quoted in 1977 PLJ 230 and 1993 PLJ 366 SB. It is obvious from the above facts that the land in dispute has been utilized under the 1972 Act in clear violation of the provisions of this Act. It may not be impossible to imagine a situation where an area which has been declared surplus under the Punjab Act acts vested in the State Govt. on 23.12.1972 when the 1972 Act came into being and gets utilized after the Utilization of Surplus Area Scheme 1976, before the affected landowner has an opportunity to object against its utilisation or takes legal recourse for getting it excluded from the surplus pool. Here in this case, however the action appears to have been taken after the position came to the notice of the Prescribed Authority. The speed with which the surplus area/allotment matter was decided in 1980 is also noticeable.