Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
G.D.Khosla, K.L.Gosain and D.K.Mahajan JJ.
Hazara Singh Ganda Singh
Versus
State Of Punjab
Civil Writ No. 1203 of 1958,
Decided On : SEPTEMBER 1, 1960
DISPLACED PERSONS (COMPENSATION AND REHABILITATION) ACT, 1954 - SECTION 30 - ARREST AND DETENTION - APPLICABILITY - LOANS ADVANCED BY STATE GOVERNMENT UNDER LAND IMPROVEMENT LOANS ACT, 1883 AND AGRICULTURISTS LOANS ACT, 1884 - WHETHER RECOVERABLE AS ARREARS OF LAND REVENUE - WHETHER PETITIONERS CAN BE ARRESTED FOR DEFAULT OF NON-PAYMENT - HELD, NO.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners, displaced persons, obtained loans from the State Government for various purposes under the Land Improvement Loans Act, 1883 and the Agriculturists Loans Act, 1884. These loans were recoverable as arrears of land revenue. Proceedings were taken by the State Government under Section 69 of the Land Revenue Act for recovery of these loans, which led to the present petitions. The sole question that had to be settled was whether the petitioners could be arrested for default of non-payment of the loans.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the petitioners could not be arrested for default of non-payment of the loans. The Court interpreted Section 30 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954, which prohibits arrests for the recovery of sums due under the Act, to include the loans advanced by the State Government under the 1883 and 1884 Acts. The Court held that these loans were now sums recoverable under the Act and therefore, in view of Section 30 of the Act, the petitioners could not be arrested.
Issues: Whether the petitioners could be arrested for default of non-payment of the loans advanced by the State Government under the Land Improvement Loans Act, 1883 and the Agriculturists Loans Act, 1884.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the loans advanced by the State Government under the 1883 and 1884 Acts were now sums recoverable under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954, and therefore, in view of Section 30 of the Act, the petitioners could not be arrested. The Court interpreted the word "due" in Section 30 of the Act to include sums payable or recoverable under the Act, and held that the loans in question, though incurred under the 1883 and 1884 Acts, were now recoverable under the Act. The Court also held that the Act was a valid piece of legislation and must prevail over the existing Indian laws to the extent to which it came in conflict with those laws.
Final Decision: The petitions were allowed and the orders of arrest issued against the petitioners were quashed.
Key Points: - Section 30 prohibits arrest for recovery of sums due under the Act (!) . - The word "due" includes sums payable or recoverable under the Act, encompassing loans from 1883 and 1884 Acts (!) (!) . - These loans are recoverable as arrears of land revenue and are considered public dues under the Act (!) (!) . - The Central Act prevails over existing state laws and general laws regarding loans (!) (!) . - The Act’s purpose is relief and rehabilitation of displaced persons (!) (!) . - Immunity from arrest applies when loans are recoverable under the Act (!) (!) . - The validity of Section 30 was upheld against contention of ultra vires (!) (!) . - Proceedings for arrest under the impugned loans were quashed (!) . - The interpretation extends "due" to include sums recoverable under the Act, not merely owed in a strict sense (!) (!) .
Mahajan, J.
1. This order will dispose of C. Ws. Nos. 1203 to 1207 of 1958, and 17, 124, 202 and 206 to 209, 509 and 510 of 1959.
2. These matters came up for decision before Bisban Narain, J. and were referred by the learned Judge for a decision by a larger Bench and by order of my Lord the Chief Justice, they have been set down for bearing before the Full Bench,
3. The petitioners in all these petitions are displaced persons and were allotted land in lieu of the lands left by them in Pakistan and with regard to these lands, proprietary rights have -also been conferred on them under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (No. 44 of 1954). The petitioner in C. W. No. 209 of 1959 in addition to his being an allottee o£ land is also a holder of a verified claim to the extent of Rs, 17,500/- and the net compensation to which he is entitled has been assessed at Rs. 6,000/-odd.
4. All these petitioners obtained loans from the State Government for one or more of the following purposes, namely:
1. For the purchase of tractors, seed, bullocks, and houses; or
2. for repairs to houses; or
3. for construction of houses; Or
4. for sinking of tubewells or wells etc.
These loans were advanced to them under the provisions of the Land Improvement Loans Act (No. 19 of 1883) and the Agriculturists Loans Act (No. 12 of 1884). Both of these Acts are Governor-Generals Acts and as such Central Acts passed long before the bifurcation of the legislative powers between the Centre and the provinces and later on the States. These laws have been saved by the Constitution Acts that have been passed from time to time and fall within the category known to the Constitution of India as the "Existing Laws". Section 4 of both of these Acts sets out the purpose for which loans may be granted, while Section 6 in the 1883 Act deals with the period for repayment of the loans and Section 7 with the recovery of loans and it is only necessary to mention that the Ioans are recoverable as if they were arrears of land revenue due in respect of that land. In the 1884 Act, the recovery section is Section 5 and there too the loan is recoverable as arrears of land revenue. Chapter 6 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act (No. 17 of 1887) deals with the collection of land revenue and Section 69 in this Chapter is in these terms:
69. (1) At any time after an arrear of land revenue has accrued a Revenue Officer may issue a warrant directing an officer named therein to arrest the defaulter and bring him before the Revenue Officer.
(2) When the defaulter is brought before the Revenue Officer, the Revenue Officer may cause him to be taken before the Collector, or keep him under personal restraint for a period not exceeding ten days and then, if the arrear is still unpaid, cause him to be taken before the Collector.
(3) When the defaulter is brought before the Collector, the Collector may issue an order to the officer in charge of the civil jail of the district, directing him to confine the defaulter in the jail for such period, not exceeding one month from the date of the order, as the Collector thinks fit.
(4) The process of arrest and detention shall not be executed against a defaulter who is a female, a minor, a lunatic or idiot".
This section permits the arrest and detention of a defaulter.
5 For recovery of these loans, proceedings were taken by, the State Government under Section 69 of the Land Revenue Act. This led to the present petitions. This Court stayed the proceedings tor the arrest of the petitioners and the sole question that has to be settled in these petitions is whether the petitioners can be arrested for default of nonpayment of the loans, which admittedly are recoverable as arrears of land revenue under the aforesaid provisions.
6. It is not disputed that the loans granted by the Rehabilitation Department to displaced persons are covered by Section 30 of Act No. 44 of 1954, and for non-payment of these loans, a displaced person cannot be ar
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
