Upon the death of the original landowner, the surplus area case has to be decided afresh in light of the provisions of Sections 10-A and 10-B of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, and Sections 8 and 12 of the Haryana Ceiling of Land Holdings Act, 1972. The heirs of the deceased landowner are entitled to select their permissible area, and the review of the order within the statutory period does not require permission from higher authorities.

1. The petitioners have challenged the order of respondent No. 1 dated 20-6-1988 vide which he disposed of nine revision petitions filed by them.

2. Reference to a few relevant facts is necessary to appreciate the points arising for adjudication in the case. Shri Brij Raj Saran, predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners was a big landowner. Proceedings for determination of his surplus area were initiated under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act (for short the Act) and by an order dated 30/01/1961, it was held that there was no surplus area with him after leaving the tenantands and landownerands permissible area. The land of the landowner was subjected to the process of consolidation. During consolidation, the Collector Agrarian vide his order dated 29/01/1968 separated the surplus area out of the area obtained by the land owner.

3. The tenants challenged the order before respondent No. 2, who accepted the appeal and remanded the case to the Collector vide order dated 10/02/1970.

4. The Collector vide his order dated 13/12/1970 imposed a penalty of 10 standard acres under Sec. 5(c) of the Act on the landowner. The land owner challenged the same in appeal which was accepted by the Commissioner vide order dated 6/04/1971 and the case was remanded to the Collector with the directions that a notice regarding imposition of penalty be served on the landowner and the tenants be also heard. The Collector vide order dated 14/09/1971 imposed a penalty of 5 standard acres on the landowner since he failed to intimate that standard acre 2 1/2 units area was mortgaged with him. The landowners and the tenants feeling aggrieved against the order of the Collector, went up in appeal before respondent No. 2, who vide his order dated 14/07/1972 accepted both the appeals and the order of Collector Surplus Area dated 14/09/1971 was set aside and the case was remanded to the Collector, Jagadhri with the following directions :-

a) The entire record be seen carefully and the landowner be given due allowance for any decrease in his holding due to consolidation. b) The land situated in village Devdhar and village Tejh be taken into account. c) Any land sold by Brij Saran landowner after 15-4-1953 be included in his permissible area. d) The permissible area of the landowner be worked out in accordance with Sec. 5 of the Act. e) The observations made by the Commissioner (in the impugned order) be kept in view imposing penalty under Sec. 5(c) of the Act.

5. The land owner unsuccessfully challenged the order of respondent No. 2 before respondent No. 1. The revision petition was dismissed vide order dated 5/05/1980. The remand order of respondent No. 2 merged in the order of respondent No. 1 and the directions contained in the order of respondent No. 2 were to be implemented.

6. The order of respondent No. 1 had not been implemented when the original landowner died on 9/03/1981 and his wife Smt. Ganga Aggarwal died on 10/03/1981. Smt. Ganga Aggarwal died testate. She bequeathed her share in agricultural land in favour of her minor grandson and granddaughter, namely, Paranav Saran and Shifali respectively.

7. The Collector Agrarian decided the case of the landowner afresh vide order dated 8/12/1983. The Collector did not afford an opportunity to the heirs of the deceased to select the permissible area. The successors to the estate of Smt. Ganga Aggarwal were not given an opportunity of hearing before declaration of surplus area. This led to the filing of two review petitions; one by the sons and the daughter of Brij Raj Saran and the other by the heirs of Smt. Ganga Aggarwal for reviewing the order dated 8/12/1983. The review applications were allowed by the Collector Agrarian vide order dated 12/03/1984; and thereafter, the surplus area case was decided afresh by him and it was found that the heirs of the deceased were small landowners and the order was passed on 7/02/1985.

8. The respondent/tenants challenged the order dated 7/02/1985 in appeal