CHANDGI RAM Vs. HARYANA STATE THROUGH COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two revision petitions have been filed against the order of the Commissioner Hisar Division dated 12.9.1994 in a surplus area case. Vide above order the Commissioner dismissed two appeals, one of them filed by the landowner and the other filed by a vendee, against orders of the Special Collector dated 11.5.1992.

(2.) FACTS of the case are that the landowner, Chandgi Ram, filed a declaration under the Punjab Act and reserved him permissible area in 1953 by filing Form 'E' as provided under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. Consolidation proceedings in the area were taken up in the year 1954 and the landowner, as also the tenants under him, were allotted new Khasra Nos. After the consolidation proceedings some time in the year 1958 the landowner changed the reservation made by him earlier and chose new Khasra Nos. and the same were allowed to him vide orders of the Prescribed Authority dated 18.7.1961 and 36.50 S. As. of his land was also declared surplus. In the meanwhile the respondent tenants Ram Kishan etc. filed their purchase application on 3.3.1959 as per new Khasra Nos., which were allotted to them after the consolidation proceedings. The purchase application was allowed vide order of the A.C.-I dated 24.10.1960. Since some of the Khasra Nos. allowed to be purchased vide the above order were included in the permissible area as allowed by the Prescribed Authority to the landowner vide order dated 14.7.1961, the landowner filed an appeal against the purchase allowed by the A.C.-I. Later the matter reached the Hon'ble High Court and they vide order dated 17.10.1967 observed that it should be first found whether the tenant was allotted or put in possession of some specified land after consolidation and if that was so then the landlord will be entitled to reserve land only out of the other land, minus the tenancy land. The purchase matter was again heard by the A.C.-I and vide order dated 12.8.1969 he confirmed the purchase of 96K land in favour of the respondent tenants. An appeal against the order was disallowed by the Collector on 20.4.1970. However in revision proceedings the Financial Commissioner observed that the orders of the High Court dated 17.10.1967 of which reference has been made above, have not been properly complied with and all parties concerned should be given a hearing.

(3.) I have heard the counsel for the parties. The counsel for the revision petitioner landowner raised the point that the order of the Prescribed Authority dated 14.7.1961 has never been set aside and the same has become final against all concerned parties. The landowner has no objection to his land in Gohana and Kalpa being declared surplus. Further, the Special Collector in his order dated 11.5.1992 has not given the details of the Khasra Nos. allowed as permissible area to the landowner and he has indicated the Khasra Nos. etc. only in respect of the tenants permissible area and the surplus area. The provisions of Section 24-A(2) of the Punjab Act have also not been complied with.