##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

****

102 CWP-16439-1994

Date of Decision: 27.02.2026

SIS RAM & ORS. ...Petitioners

Vs.

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. …Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Present:- Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chopra, Sr. Advocate with

Mr. Brahmjot Singh Nahar, Advocate and

Mr. Jitender Dhanda, Advocate for the petitioners

Mr. Akshit Pathania, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana

Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate

for respondents No.3 to 23

***

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioners through instant petition under Articles

226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking setting aside of order

dated 08.08.1994 passed by Financial Commissioner, Haryana whereby

revision petition filed by the respondent-State was allowed.

2. The prescribed authority in terms of provision of Punjab

Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (for short ‘1953 Act’) declared Sis

Ram (Petitioner No.1) big landowner and his 855 Kanals land as surplus

vide order dated 16.09.1968. Shadi Ram, father of Sis Ram transferred

515 Bighas 9 Biswas land in favour of his daughter-in-law, namely Smt.

Dhai (Petitioner No.2). The Collector (Agrarian) vide order dated

12.02.1960 declared her as small landowner as her land after conversion

was less than 30 standard acres. No appeal, review or revision was filed

against said order. Petitioner No.2 - Smt. Dhai transferred 305 Kanals 6

Marlas land by way of gift to her daughter-in-law Smt. Sunehri Devi.

1 of 16

::: Downloaded on - 07-03-2026 18:36:09 :::

CWP-16439-1994 -2-

Daughters of Smt. Dhai who are petitioners No.4 to 8 as well as legal

heirs of Smt. Dhai filed Civil Suit seeking declaration that they are

owners in possession in equal share of land measuring 210 Kanals 18

Marlas. The suit was decreed on 23.05.1972. Petitioner No.1- Sis Ram

filed declaration under Section 9 of Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings

Act, 1972 (for short ‘1972 Act’) read with Rule 8 of 1973 Rules. The

prescribed authority accepted his declaration and held transfer to his

daughters as bona fide. It was further held that there is no surplus land in

his hand. Under Secretary filed revision petition dated 09.12.1988 under

Section 18(6) of 1972 Act before Financial Commissioner with a prayer

to work out surplus area in the hands of petitioners and set aside order

dated 07.03.1979. The revision petition was allowed vide order dated

08.08.1994.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that impugned

order was passed without jurisdiction and it amounts to colourable

exercise of power. The Revenue Authorities preferred revision before

Financial Commissioner though under Section 18(6) of 1972 Act,

however, it was principally under Section 18(5). Section 18(5) ceased to

exist after 1976, thus, Section 18(5) could not be invoked. In any case,

petition under Section 18(6) was filed after 9 years from the date of

impugned order, thus, it was badly hit by doctrine of delay and laches.

The order in the case of petitioner No.2-Smt. Dhai was passed in 1960

under 1953 Act. Said order was not under review/revision still while

considering revision against order dated 07.03.1979 passed by Prescribed

Authority, the Financial Commissioner indirectly set aside order dated

12.02.1960 passed by Collector whereby land of Smt. Dhai was declared

within permissible limit. The respondent nowhere in the petition or

2 of 16

::: Downloaded on - 07-03-2026 18:36:10 :::

CWP-16439-1994 -3-

impugned order have given explanation for delay. The authorities could

avail remedy of review or appeal, however, no such remedy was availed

and after the expiry of 09 years remedy of revision was availed. The land

in question was transferred in favour of daughter-in-law and daughters of

Sis Ram. There was Civil Court decree in favour of petitioner’s

daughters and daughter-in-law. The revisionary authority without issuing

notice to affected parties declared decree of Civil Court invalid and

passed impugned orders. No order could be passed against daughters or

daughter-in-law without granting opportu