- (1.) The petitioner in this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India have impugned the order of respondent No. 1 dated January 9, 1988.
(2.) Reference to the relevant facts is necessary to resolve the disputed question of law raised in the petition.
(3.) Petitioner No. 1, after partition of the country, was allotted land measuring 43.7 standard acres in villages Lohgarh, Abusharbar, Jutian Wali, Nai Dabwali in Tehsil Dabwali, District Sirsa in lieu of the land abandoned by him in Bahawalpur State. Proceedings were initiated against him under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (for short, 'the 1953 Act'). He was not found in possession of any surplus area. On the death of his father some land devolved upon him by inheritance and surplus area case was re-opened under the 1953 Act and land measuring 97 Kanals 11 Marlas was declared surplus, which was disposed of by the Prescribed Authority under the Rules. On April 14, 1977 petitioner No. 1 submitted declaration under the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings 1972 (for short 'the 1972 Act'). The Prescribed Authority Dabwali vide its order dated November 18, 1980 found that land measuring 1416 Kanals 11 Marlas of 'C' grade was surplus with the petitioner. On appeal, the order of the Prescribed Authority was upheld by the Collector, Sirsa vide order dated September 6, 1982. The petitioner challenged the orders of the Prescribed Authority and the Collector in revision before the Commission, Hissar Division, Hissar, who vide his order dated June 6, 1984, upheld the principal claim of the petitioner and held that the transfers made by him were bona fide. On Scrutiny of the record, he further found that the position of the petitioner's area was as under :- "(1) Total area on 24.1.71 ... 1656 K-11 M (2) Total area purchased after 24.1.71 .... 195 K 06 M (3) Total .... 1851 K-17 M (4) Gair Mumkin area .... 44 K-08 M (5) Balance ... 1807 K-09 M (-) 1035 K-04 M CCA 772 K-05 M UCA (and) 2397 K-10 M equal to 'C' class (6) Transferred area 'C' class .... 742 K-10 M (7) Balance .... 1655 K-00 M (8) Permissible area which the applicant is entitled 2-3/5 units .... 1123 K-04 M (9) Balance area which is declared surplus .... 531 K-16 M The petitioner moved an application before the Commissioner for rectification of the clerical mistake made in the order dated June 6, 1984. It was stated in the application that the Commissioner had mentioned in his order that the transfered area of 'C' category was 742 K-11 M while in fact it was 936 K-13 M. The Commissioner sent for a report from the Prescribed Authority and on receipt of the report he found that the actual transferred area of 'C' class was 936 K 13 M. He held that the balance surplus area in the hands of the petitioner would be 337 K-13 M instead of 531 K-16 M. When the order of the Commissioner dated December 11, 1984 was received by the Collector for implementation, he made reference on December 14,1 1984 to respondent No. 1 that the Commissioner had wrongly held that the transfers made by the petitioner were bona fide. On receipt of the reference, respondent No. 1 issued notices to the parties and quashed the orders of the Commissioner dated June 6, 1984 and December 11, 1984. The sole consideration was that the latter had not correctly interpreted the judgment of the apex Court in Bhupendra Singh v. State of U.P. and others, 1981 AIR(SC) 1157;