LAWS(P&H)-2019-4-406

RESHAM SINGH Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB AND ORS.

Decided On April 05, 2019
RESHAM SINGH Appellant
V/S
Financial Commissioner, Punjab And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dtd. 8/3/2017 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Chief Sales Commissioner-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar respondent No.3, whereby, the land allotted in favour of the father of the petitioner, late Shri Darshan Singh, under the Punjab Package Deal Properties (Disposal) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as '1976 Act') on a complaint submitted by respondents No.4 and 5 that the father of the petitioner has violated the terms of allotment/sale of the land by entering into two agreements to sell and handing over the possession thereof even prior to issuance of the sale certificate has been cancelled, order dtd. 18/5/2018 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Commissioner, Roopnagar Division, Roopnagar respondent No.2, upholding the order passed by the Chief Sales Commissioner-cum- Deputy Commissioner, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, order dtd. 5/12/2018 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Punjab respondent No.1 dismissing the revision petition preferred by the petitioner.

(2.) It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned orders cannot sustain as the Chief Sales Commissioner-cum- Deputy Commissioner, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, has cancelled the allotment of land made in favour of the petitioner vide order dtd. 8/3/2017 (Annexure P-4) merely on the ground that the father of the petitioner had entered into two agreements to sell within the period of restraining imposed in the terms and conditions of allotment/sale certificate. He contends that this bar with regard to non-disposal of the property prior to passing of the specified period being violative of the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, cannot sustain. In support of this contention, he places reliance upon the judgments of this Court in CWP decided on 3/7/2014 and CWP No.999 of 1993, titled as 'Mohinder Singh and others Vs. The Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Punjab and others', decided on 4/2/2015, wherein, it has been held that the conditions imposed with regard to non-selling of the property within the time stipulated in the allotment/sale certificate cannot sustain being violative of provisions of Ss. 10 and 11 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. He, thus, contends that the impugned orders, on this ground itself, cannot sustain and deserve to be set aside.

(3.) That apart, counsel for the petitioner contends that the validity of the alleged agreements to sell dtd. 3/3/1993 and 10/10/1999 could not have been taken into consideration by the revenue authorities as the execution of the said agreements has been disputed by the father of the petitioner. He further contends that since these agreements to sell have been disputed by the father of the petitioner rather denied its execution, the question of handing over the possession in pursuance to those agreements to sell does not arise. He, thus, contends that the impugned orders deserve to be set aside and this writ petition allowed upholding the order of allotment in favour of the petitioner.