Ranjit Singh, J. - (1.) The petitioners were owners in possession of land measuring 463 kanals 14 marlas comprising khewat No. 6/6 Khatoni No. 13 to 19 situated in village Untsal, Tehsil Thanesar,District Kurukshetra. On 02.07.1960, the Collector, Karnal declared 3 standard acres, 8 standard units land as surplus in the hands of Atma Ram son of Jamna Das, (grandfather of predecessor in interest of the petitioners herein) under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (Punjab Act). The petitioners claim to be in possession through their forefathers which is continuous till date. On 07.01.1972, grandfather of the petitioners transferred land to his sons vide decree, which was mutated in their favour. The said transfer was before the date of operation of Section 12 (3) of Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 (Haryana Act), which came into effect w.e.f. 23.12.1972. As per the petitioners, surplus land, which was declared, thus, would not vest in the State of Haryana under the provisions of Section 12 (3) of the Haryana Act.
(2.) On 19.11.1977, Atma Ram expired. The Declaration form filed by Atma Ram under the provisions of new Act was decided on 18.01.1980 stating that no land was surplus in the hands of Atma Ram. The petitioners stated that this order was never challenged and has attained finality. Still subsequently, the Government made an attempt to allot this surplus land on 27.09.1976 and the order was issued on 28.03.1982 in favour of Antu and Amar Singh. Antu died on 27.06.1992 and Amar Singh left the village, hence, the allotment was cancelled. On 08.07.1982, the land in question was allotted to Isham Singh, Kartara and Ishri. The petitioners stated that respondent/State took possession of land in question vide rapat roznamcha dated 30.10.1984, which was purely paper transaction. This action of the respondents was challenged in the civil suit, which was decreed in favour of the petitioners on 23.08.1989. This rapat was declared null and void.
(3.) On 05.12.1985, sons of Atma Ram moved application under Section 10-A of the old Act read with Section 8 of the new Act. The said application was decided in favour of the applicants on 05.12.1985 by the prescribed authority and it exempted the area declared surplus under the old Act from the surplus pool. The area, thus, remains in hands of Atma Ram and his sons. Resultantly, the allotment of land in question was cancelled and held entitled to six separate units to the sons of Atma Ram. It is stated that the proceedings of surplus case of Atma Ram were pending at the time of his death. Death of Atma Ram affected the surplus area case, which was required to be re-determined. The order passed was, however, challenged by one of the allottees in appeal before the Collector, Kurukshetra who allowed the same and set aside the order passed by the prescribed authority on 27.02.1987. The State of Haryana did not prefer an appeal against this order. As per the petitioners, the appellate Court wrongly concluded that the so called surplus land had vested in State of Haryana on the appointed day i.e. 24.01.1971. As per the petitioners, reliance is placed on paper transaction of rapat roznamcha dated 30.10.1984. The petitioners still would claim that the possession remain with them and, thus, the surplus case would have to be re-opened in the hands of Atma Ram. The order passed in the year 1987 was challenged by the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners. The Commissioner, however, dismissed the same on 27.04.1988. This order was challenged by filing revision, which was dismissed by respondent No.1.;