- (1.) Through this petition, the petitioners who happened to be Lambardars of village Dhadrian, Tehsil and District Sangrur, have assailed the action of the respondent revenue authorities of effecting recoveries from them of the water rate due to the Government from the proprietors of the village other than the petitioners. Such an order was issued by the Tehsildar, respondent No. 1 on February 21, 1966. Against that order the petitioners filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala, who vide his order dated January 30, 1967, set aside the said order with the following observations :- "The Lambardars of a village are members of the proprietory body. In that capacity are not liable to pay water rate due from the cultivators. If of course a particular Lambardar has received water rate from the cultivators and has not credited the same into the Treasury, he is liable to pay the same. He is, however, liable to pay the water rate due from him as a cultivator. No such position seems, from the record, to have arisen in this case. I, therefore, set aside the order of the Collector and direct him that the matter should be looked at by himself or by Assistant Collector." According to the allegations of the petitioners, in spite of the order of the Commissioner, the Tehsildar, Sangrur did not desist from taking steps to effect the recovery from the petitioners in the manner stated earlier. This led to the filing of the present petition.
(2.) The learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to show me any reason as to why the subordinate revenue officers are not complying with the above-said order of the Commissioner, Annexure 'A' to the petition. The counsel, however, submits that under the law the petitioners can be proceeded against for effecting this recovery in the manner provided for recovery of arrears of land revenue. His submission is that under Section 98, clause (d) any sum leviable by or under the authority of the Government as water rate, can be recovered as arrears of land revenue. He then points out that the word 'defaulter' has been defined in Section 3, sub-section (8) of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, in the following words :- " 'defaulter' means a person liable for an arrear of land revenue and includes a person who is responsible as surety for the payment of the arrears." His contention further is that the Lambardar - the office which the petitioners are undisputably holding is responsible for the collection of the land revenue and in case he himself fails to perform his duties, then he can be himself proceeded against under paragraph 503 read with paragraphs 305 and 307 of the Land Administration Manual. After going through the said paragraphs, I do not find that such a proposition is deducible therefrom. It is nowhere provided that in case the Lambardar has failed to perform his duties, then the recovery can be effected from his or his property. He may be proceeded against for non-performance of his duties. In this view of the matter, I do not find any ground which can sustain the action of the respondents in effecting the recovery of water rate charges due from the proprietors of the village other than the petitioners from the petitioners.
(3.) I, therefore, allow this petition and restrain the respondent authorities from recovering the water rate charges in any manner from the petitioners with regard to the land which belongs to the proprietors other than the petitioners. However, no order as to costs in passed. Petition accepted.;