D. P. Mohapatra, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 25-3-1991 dismissing Civil Writ Petition No. 4464/91 filed by the appellants. The impugned order reads:"No ground to interfere has been made out. Dismissed".
(2.) The controversy raised in the case relates to distribution of surplus land under Khasra Nos. 178 and 189 in the Village Ballabhgarh, District Faridabad, Haryana. The land is stated to be 'banjar' land. It was initially a part of the land holding of Col. Harinder Singh Brar. The surplus land in his possession was determined and Khasara Nos. 178 and 189 were included in the surplus area. It appears that the provisions of Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings (Act, 1972) were made applicable in the matter. There are four parties to the controversy raised in the proceeding; Col. Harinder Singh Brar, the land owner (since deceased represented by LRs.), one Jawahar Singh who laid claim to certain areas as an ejected tenant, three hundred seven persons including the appellants 3 to 183 who were allotted the land under the aforementioned two khasras as landless persons and the State of Haryana.
(3.) Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Special Collector, the parties moved the Commissioner, Ambala Division in appeal. After disposal of the appeals the land owner and the allottees filed Revision Petitions before the Financial Commissioner, Haryana, in ROR No. 60 of 1987-88 and ROR No. 102 of 1988-89 respectively. Another petition was filed by the State of Haryana, ROR No. 220 of 1988-89, invoking suo-motu power of the Financial Commissioner to correct certain errors and illegalities committed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division. The Financial Commissioner by the order dated 31-8-90 disposed of all the cases. The revisional authority after discussing the rival claims of the contesting parties formulated three issues: 1. Whether rectangle numbers 178 and 189 in revenue estate Ballabgarh form part of the surplus area of the landowner, the late Col. Harinder Singh 2. Whether land in village Bhainsa Tibba should also be included in the permissible area of the big landowner and the necessary adjustment to be made from land in Khasra No. 387 of village Dhana and 3. If these two rectangle numbers in Ballabgarh are found to be part of the surplus area in the hands of the big landowner, whether this land in rectangle Nos. 178 and 189 should be allotted to the heirs of Jawahar Singh or to the 307 allottees or should be utilised by the State for a public purpose by denying allotment of this land to any of the rival claimants. The revisional authority answered the first issue holding that khasra Nos. 178 and 189 in Ballabgarh and khasra Nos. 52/20/1, 52/26, 52/27 and 52/28 in Bhainsa Tibba near Kalka should be included in the permissible area of the land owner and necessary adjustment should be made of khasra No. 387 of village Dhana. The revisional authority further held that since khasra No. 178 is being taken out of surplus land and included in the permissible area of the land owner the claim of the heirs of Jawahar Singh and others for allotment of portions of land under this Khasra number is not tenable and is rejected. ;