M.M. Kumar, J. - (1.) This is an appeal against order dated 17.9.1992 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Writ Petition No. 2147 of 1980. The appellants prayer for issuance of a direction to the official respondents that they may not utilise the land in dispute in pursuance to order dated 9.10.1979, as also their prayer for restraining the official respondents from entering the mutation of land in favour of the State, have been rejected.
(2.) Hardeva (deceased) was a big land owner. The appellants and proforma respondent Nos. 12 to 15 are his sons and daughters. Proforma respondent No.16 is the widow of late Shri Hardeva. By an order dated 12.12.1959, the Collector Agrarian, Rohtak declared 51 acres of land belonging to Hardeva as surplus under the Punjab Security of -Land Tenures act, 1958 (for brevity, Punjab Act). On account of consolidation of holdings, some short -fall was discovered and under Sec. 24 -A(2) of the Punjab Act, the case of Hardeva was reopened but still land holdings measuring 39 acres 7 -1/4 units was declared surplus vide order dated 18.8.1966. In the meanwhile, Hardev had transferred 4/5th of his holdings to his four sons, namely, Dharam Pal, Sukh Pal, Jai Parkash and Ram Rattan vide mutation No.733 dated 26.2.1955. It is appropriate to mention here that Shiva Charan another son - Appellant No.4 was born in the year 1957 -58 much after the mutation was sanctioned. Hardeva died on 25.9.1978 and the land owned and possessed by him was inherited by the appellants.
(3.) On the basis of mutation sanctioned in their favour, the sons of Shri Hardeva filed an application dated 27.4.1977 under Sec. 8 of the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings act, ,1972 (for brevity, Haryana Act). They claimed that since the mutation was sanctioned before 30.7.1958 i.e. the date given under Sec. 8(1)(a) of the Haryana Act, they were entitled to be given the benefit of excluding 4/5th of the area declared surplus. The Prescribed Authority/Allotment Authority, Gohana accepted their application and recorded the findings that Dharam Pal, Sukh Pal, Jai Parkash and Ram Rattan were entitled to 4/5th sliare of the surplus area as the original land owner had transferred that area out of his total area before 30.7.1958 according to the provisions of Sec. 8(1)(a) of the Haryana Act. The authority concerned also ordered that mutation be entered in the name of State regarding the remaining area i.e. 7 standard acres, 13 -1/4 units as mentioned in the order dated 9.10.1979. The relevant extract of the order passed by the Prescribed Authority reads as under: - "After hearing both the parties and perusing the concerned file and the evidence on record the father of the petitioners Shri Hardeva s/o Ram Parshad transferred 4/5 share of his total area of his surplus area transferred vide mutation 733 in view of decision dated 26.2.55 to his sons Sukh Pal, Dharam Pal, Jai Parkash, Ram Rattan. It is therefore clear that out of his declared surplus area the land owner transferred his 4/5 share before 30.7.58. Therefore, this surplus land can not be utilised under Sec. 8 of the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 nor it vested in the State of Haryana nor it can be utilised for settling the tenants. This matter has been clarified by the instructions of Haryana Govt. Revenue Department vide Memo No.6632 -AR(11) 76/3309 dated 29.10.76. Therefore, I accept this petition -to this extent and ordered that the declared surplus area situated and comprised in Killa No. 58 -1 (7 -12), 15(8 -0), 16(5 -9), 17(8 -0), 25(8 -) 59/10.2(3 -12), 21(6 -8) 20 -24(9 -14) 17 min(3 -!l) 18(8 -0) 19(8 -0) total 86 kanais 17 marlas (7 std acres 13 -1/4 units). The mutation of which be entered in the name of the Government and this area can be utilised for settling other tenants and the remaining surplus area can not vest in the Govt. nor the mutation of which can be entered in favour of the Govt. nor this area can be utilised for settling the other tenants.";