K. Kannan, J. - (1.) The order of the Financial Commissioner is challenged at the instance of the petitioner, who was an "ejected tenant". The allotment by way of resettlement after he was ejected from out of the surplus pool available was a subject of contest at the instance of the 4th respondent-Jantar Singh. His objection was that in a draw of lots made on 01.11.1977, he had been shown in serial No.2 as a landless person and he ought to have been preferred in the manner of allotment. This objection was upheld and a resettlement ordering the allotment of the disputed properties made in favour of the petitioner was set aside and the orders were passed directing the allotment to be considered in favour of the 4th respondent and remanded to the Assistant Collector for necessary action. It is this order which is in challenge before this Court.
(2.) The petitioner had been a tenant of the property of one Amin Chand and Kishan Chand @ Har Kishan Lal, who were the original owners of the property. The order of ejectment was made on 26.12.1978 but the Assistant Collector held that it will be subject on the tenant's right of resettlement under Section 9-A of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act. The Government had declared surplus in an extent of 85 kanals 15 marlas in the hands of Abinash Chander and applications had been filed at the instance of the landlords Amin Chand and Kishan Chand for giving effect to the order of ejectment and for resettlement of the tenant in the property declared as surplus in the hands of Abinash Chander. Out of the extent of 85 kanals 15 marlas which was equivalent to 1.6114 hectares, an extent of 58 kanals 8 marlas of land had been directed to be allotted to him which was equivalent to 1.0648 hectares. This extent was exactly the extent of property in respect of which the tenant was ordered to be evicted at the instance of Amin Chand and Kishan Chand.
(3.) This allotment was contested by the 4th respondent and there was a direction given by the Financial Commissioner for consideration of allotment to him in the manner referred above. The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out to the relevant provisions of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act and Rules that detail the procedure of how an ejected tenant could be readjusted. The relevant provisions are contained in Section 9, 9-A, 10-A and 14-A of the Act. Section 9 contains the provision for ejectment of a tenant at the instance of small landowner, who makes a declaration of the property which he wants to secure through his own personal cultivation. It is an admitted case that the original landlords claim themselves to be small landowners and obtained the order of ejectment only on the ground of their requirement for personal cultivation. Section 14-A of the Act sets out a procedure for ejectment and recovery of arrears but makes it subject to the provisions of Section 9-A. Section 9-A contains a provision of accommodation of tenant from surplus area. This accommodation shall be done on a surplus area in accordance with the provisions of Section 10-A. The resettlement of the tenant, namely, the petitioner came about in the property allotted as surplus in the hands of Abinash Chander in terms of Section 10-A.;