STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. ATTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under clause 10 of the Letters Patent has been directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated April 8, 1964 which was rendered on the concession of the counsel that the writ petition was concluded by a Bench decision of this Court in Nemi Chand v. Financial Commissioner, Punjab,1964 PunLR 272. On the basis of that decision, the learned Judge accepted the writ petition and quashed the order dated April 27, 1962, passed by the Collector (Agrarian), district Sangrur and directed the authorities to re-decide the matter regarding the surplus area of the respondents (writ petitioners) in the light of the observations made in the Bench decision mentioned above. In the appeal before us, it is urged that the concession made by the counsel before the learned Single Judge was not correct and seems to have been made without studying the provisions of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955. Nemi Chand's case concerns the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, wherein "land" does not include Banjar Qadim and Banjar Jadid as was held in that case. In Section 32-N if the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955, "land" has been defined to include Banjar land save as otherwise provided. Under this Act, therefore, Banjar Qadim and Banjar Jadid land will have to be taken into consideration for the purposes of proceedings under Chapter IV-A of the said Act. The judgment of the learned Single Judge, therefore, has to be set aside as it was rendered on a wrong concession made by the counsel of both sides.

(2.) For the reasons given above, this appeal is accepted and the other of the learned Single Judge dated April 8, 1964, is set aside. The writ petition is directed to be heard by the learned Single Judge for decision on merits. In view of the fact that the counsel for both the parties were to be blamed for the wrong decision under appeal, parties are left to bear their owns costs of the appeal. I agree. Appeal accepted.