MUNSHI SINGH Vs. TEHSILDAR AGRARIAN REFORMS, SAMBA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Tehsildar Samba took cognizance of an application preferred by Mrs. Ram Piari. In this application she had pleaded that in her capacity being daughter of Inder Singh son of Buti Singh, she is entitled to the inheritance of Inder Singh. The concerned Tehsildar obtained report from the Naib Tehsildar. After the perusal of record it was found that the appellant had been allotted 13 kanals of land, but she was still required to be given 2 kanal and 17 marlas of land with a view to give that much share a direction was given to restore 2 kanals and 17 marlas of land to the petitioner. This order was sought to be implemented in terms of Section 27 of the Agrarian Reforms Act 1976. This was objected to. The petitioner remained unsuccessful upto the level of Special Tribunal. Now the present position has been preferred.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the respondents submits that Section 27 of the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 would not be available to the petitioner. For facility of reference this provision is quoted below: -

(3.) AFTER having heard learned counsel for the parties. I am of the opinion that requisite orders were rightly passed by the concerned Tehsildar on the application preferred by Ram Piari. Provisions of Section 27(2) of the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 would be attracted to the facts of this case. Any transfer either by the act of parties or by the operation of law is required to be implemented under Section 27 of the 1976 Act. Therefore, the view expressed by the concerned Tehsildar cannot be faulted. The order passed by Tehsildar was rightly upheld by the higher authorities. This petition is found to be without merit and is dismissed.