SARUP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS shall dispose of Civil Writ Petition No. 5899 of 1983 and Regular Second Appeal No. 2909 of 1997.

(2.) IN the writ petition, challenge is to order dated 14.10.1980 passed by Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala (for short the Commissioner) and order dated 24.8.1983 passed by the Financial Commissioner, Punjab (for short the FC) whereby order of Commissioner was affirmed. In appeal, the Commissioner set aside order dated 23.6.1980 passed by the Collector Agrarian, Malerkotla (for short the Collector).

(3.) AFTER hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and on going through the record, I am of the view that the order of the Collector reducing surplus area without issuing notice to the State or persons, likely to be affected, was totally without jurisdiction. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also not been able to point out any provision of law under which the Collector could review order dated 14.9.1964 vide which the land was declared surplus. Case of big landowner, Sarup Singh was being prosecuted by his mother Smt. Kesro Devi and throughout these proceedings, she never alleged that her husband Ranjit Singh during his life time had allotted the land to her. Her plea that land was allotted to her in family partition has, thus, rightly been disbelieved by the Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner. It has come on record that Nazar Singh, respondent No. 6 had not been allotted any surplus land of any landowner any where and his rights and interest were bound to be affected by order dated 23.6.1980 passed by the Collector. He being one of the aggrieved persons, had a right to file an appeal against the order of the Collector as the order intended to reduce the surplus area of big landowner under whom Nazar Singh was holding land as a tenant.