- (1.) This judgment will dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 835 and 4532 of 1974, as the same orders of the revenue authorities under the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, (hereinafter called the Act), have been challenged therein.
(2.) The facts may be enumerated in brief.
(3.) Respondent No. 20, Shrimati Charanjit Kaur, who was the owner of the land, in dispute, measuring 306 bighas 6 biswas situated in village Piand, Tehsil and District Patiala sold the same by means of a registered sale deed to the petitioners and one Bishan Singh, in 1959. Out of them, Bishan Singh has died and his legal representatives are respondent Nos. 16 to 19. Respondent Nos. 5 to 15 submitted applications on March 15, 1961, under Section 22 of the Act, before respondent No. 3, for the grant of proprietary rights of the lands under their tenancies. The prescribed authority under the Act, allowed these applications by order dated September 13, 1961. Appeals by the landowners were accepted by the Collector and the cases were remanded for de novo decision by order dated September 7, 1962. On remand, the Assistant Collector, First Grade, Patiala, by his order dated February 27, 1963, allowed the purchase applications. The transferee-landowners again approached the Collector, Patiala, by way of appeal, but did not succeed and the appeals were dismissed on August 30, 1963. Revision petitions before the Financial Commissioner were also dismissed by his order dated May 4, 1964. The transferee-landowners challenged this order by means of seven separate writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution which were allowed on June 14, 1966 and the cases were remanded for de novo decision and the prescribed authority was directed to determine the following questions : (1) Whether on the date, the President Act 8 of 1953, came into force, Shrimati Charanjit Kaur was in possession of any area in excess of 30 standard acres and thus it was not necessary for her to apply for reservation under Section 5 of that Act. (2) Whether Shrimati Charanjit Kaur had a right to apply for reservation of land under Section 32(b) of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955; and (3) If the answer to the above question is in the negative, whether her application for reservation made in May 1958, was within time in view of the provisions of Section 5 of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955 ? The Assistant Collector, by his order dated June 29, 1967 (Annexure A), allowed all the purchase applications and decided the above-mentioned three questions in favour of the tenants and against the transferee-landowners. The appeals filed by the landowners before the Collector were also dismissed by order dated March 26, 1968 (Annexure B). This order was challenged by means of revision petitions before the Financial Commissioner who, by his detailed order, dismissed them by his order dated April 27, 1973 (Annexure C). These orders of the Assistant Collector, Collector and the Financial Commissioner, are sought to be quashed in these two writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.;