Back
2010 Supreme(P&H) 1485
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Adarsh Kumar Goel and Alok Singh JJ.
Kamla Devi
Versus
State Of Haryana
Letter Patent Appeal No. 55 of 2010,
Decided On : APRIL 21, 2010
IMPORTANT POINT
Surplus Area--Determination of--Option--Proceedings for determination of Surplus area commenced prior to enforcement of 1972 Act--Option given by landholder cannot be changed on say of transferee or another authority under the 1953 Act to exclude the transferred land from surplus pool--Provision of section 8(3) of 1972 Act not applicable.
Headnote:(A) Haryana Ceiling of Lands Holding Act, 1953, S.5(c)-- Haryana Ceiling of Lands Holding Act, 1972, S.8(3) & 33(2)(iv)--Surplus Area--Determination of--Selection of Permissible Area--If proceedings for determination of surplus area commenced before enforcement of 1972 Act and finalized after enactment of 1972 Act, option/selection of permissible land--Surplus pool would be as per provisions of 1953 Act--As per sub-section (iv) of Section 33(2) of 1972 Act, power exercisable under Section 5(C) of 1953 Act shall be exercised by the land holder as if 1972 Act is not passed--After exercise of option pertaining to permissible land--Surplus land, shall be used by State Government as per the 1972 Act only--In the 1953 Act, landholder was not required to include land transferred in the permissible area at the first instance--Provisions of Section 8(3) of the 1972 Act has no application. (Para 10)
(B) Haryana Ceiling of Lands Holding Act, 1953, S.5(c)--Haryana Ceiling of Lands Holding Act, 1972, S.8(3) & 33(2)(iv)--Surplus Area--Determination of--Option--Proceedings for determination of Surplus area commenced prior to enforcement of 1972 Act--Option given by landholder cannot be changed on say of transferee or another authority under the 1953 Act to exclude the transferred land from surplus pool--Provision of section 8(3) of 1972 Act not applicable. (Paras 14, 20, 21 & 22)
Alok Singh, J.
1. The appellants are assailing order dated 18.11.2009 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court whereby allowing CWP No. 2979 of 1989, in part remanding the matter to the competent authority for the limited purpose to consider the case of the petitioners for the grant of benefit provided under Section 8(3) of the Haryana Ceiling of Lands Holding Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the 1972 Act).
2. Brief facts of the present case are that Jai Pal Singh was a big landholder; some area in the hands of Jai Pal Singh was declared surplus under the provisions of Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the 1953 Act) vide order dated 28.7.1960. Jai Pal Singh filed an appeal before the Commissioner, which was dismissed vide order dated 14.11.1960; revision was also dismissed by the Financial Commissioner vide order dated 1.5.1961; this Court vide order dated 12.3.1962 passed in CWP No. 369 of 1961 remanded the matter to the competent authority for fresh decision on the question of surplus area in the hands of Jai Pal Singh; this Court in the order dated 12.3.1962 directed to exclude entire land sold by Jai Pal Singh prior to 30.7.1958 from the total land held surplus; a chance/option was also given to the landholder to make his selection of permissible area, in accordance with law. After remand, the writ petitioners/their predecessors purchased land measuring 61 kanals 14 marlas from Jai Pal Singh vide sale deed dated 18.6.1974; the Collector vide order dated 12.5.1978 declared some land of Jai Pal Singh as surplus after giving benefit of the land sold by Jai Pal Singh prior to 30.7.1958 as directed by this Court vide order dated 12.3.1962; the land owner did not furnish list of choice. Accordingly, the Collector described Khasra numbers to be included in the surplus area vide order dated 20.5.1978. Jai Pal Singh challenged the order of the Collector dated 20.5.1978 in appeal, which was allowed by the Commissioner vide order dated 14.11.1979 remanding the matter to the Collector with a direction that Jai Pal Singh would be allowed to give list of Khasra Nos. to the Collector; Jai Pal Singh, predecessor-ininterest of the present appellants submitted list on 20.11.1979 mentioning Khasra Nos. therein to be taken in surplus pool; the Collector vide order dated 20.10.1981 accepted the list submitted by Jai Pal Singh; Mohan Singh predecessor-in-in- terest of the writ petitioners filed an application before the prescribed authority saying land purchased by him was wrongly included in the surplus pool and no notice was given to him before accepting Khasra Nos. purchased by him in surplus pool; application moved by Mohan Singh was dismissed by the prescribed authority vide order dated 11.10.1983; appeal filed by Mohan Singh was accepted by the Collector vide order dated 6.2.1984 with the direction that surplus area first of all is to be taken from the land of the owner and only if, surplus land would not be completed from the holding of Jai Pal Singh then the area purchased by Mohan Singh be included in the surplus pool; order of the Collector was challenged before the Commissioner; the Commissioner accepted the appeal filed by the predecessor-in-interest of the big land holder vide order dated 17.4.1985. The petitioners preferred revision before the Financial Commissioner, which was also dismissed vide order dated 18.2.1987. Order of the Financial Commissioner was challenged by filing writ petition, which was allowed by learned Single Judge vide impugned judgment dated 18.11.2009.
3. Learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment has observed that the writ petitioners being interested persons are entitled to be considered for the grant of benefit under Section 8(3) of the 1972 Act. Learned Single Judge further observed that land purchased by the petitioners would be included in the surplus pool only if, surplus area cannot be calculated-completed from the land of the big landholder exc
