MOHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY virtue of power vested in this Court and originally, invoking the provisions under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner Mohan Singh (since deceased represented through Kirpal Singh and others) filed the present writ petition in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned orders dated 17.4.1985 (Annexure P5) passed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala and 18.2.1987 (Annexure P6) passed by the Financial Commissioner, Haryana.

(2.) THE matrix of the facts culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal, of present writ petition and emanating from the record, is that Jai Pal son of Sharda Ram was the big landowner. His land was declared surplus under the provisions of Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Punjab Act') vide order dated 28.7.1960 (Annexure R1) by the competent authority. He challenged the same before the statutory authorities. Ultimately, this Court remitted the matter back to the concerned Collector Agrarian for its decision in accordance with law. Thereafter, the Collector Agrarian after granting the exemption of the land, which had already been transferred on or before 30.7.1958, declared the remaining area as surplus vide order dated 12.5.1978 (Annexure R2). Since the big landowner did not provide the list of Khasra numbers to select his permissible area, therefore, the Naib Tehsildar Agrarian put the land measuring 36 standard acres 47 units in surplus pool of his own vide order dated 20.5.1978 (Annexure R3). The prescribed authority issued notice to the original petitioner-Mohan Singh and in pursuance thereof, he filed an application (Annexure R5) for giving him an opportunity of hearing, inter-alia, pleading that the land mentioned therein situated in village Kheri Shishgarh, Tehsil Pehowa, District Kurukshetra was purchased by him from the widow and son of big landowner Jai Pal. He received notice (dated 20.6.1983) on 2.7.1983 under Section 13(2) of the Punjab Act for taking possession. It was alleged that neither he had duly been served nor any opportunity to produce necessary evidence was provided to him under Section 90 of the Punjab Act. That being so, he prayed that he may be provided an opportunity to plead his case in this connection.

(3.) HOWEVER , the revision petition filed by Smt. Kamla Devi and her sons (legal representatives of Jai Pal) was accepted and the order dated 6.2.1984 (Annexure P4) passed by the Collector was quashed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala vide order dated 17.4.1985 (Annexure P5). The revision petition filed by Mohan Singh-petitioner was also dismissed in limine by the Financial Commissioner, Haryana vide order dated 18.2.1987 (Annexure P6).