D.K. Mahajan, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and is directed against the order of the Pepsu Land Commission dated the 17th October, 1961, and of the Collector dated the 25th January, 1960. In order to appreciate the grievance of the petitioner, it will be necessary to set out the facts briefly.
(2.) ACCORDING to him, the petitioner formed a joint Hindu family with his two sons. There was a partition between the father and the sons with the result that no area beyond the permissible limit was left with the father or with either of the sons. In this view of the matter, the petitioner did not file any return under section 32 -B of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955 (No. 13 of 1955) hereinafter referred to as the Act. The Collector proceeded to determine the area of the petitioner as surplus under section 32 -C on the ground that in the case of a joint Hindu family the family has to be treated as one unit and the partition has to be ignored. In the proceedings that were taken under section 32 -C, a claim was made under section 82 -K(1) (iv) for excluding 10 pukhta Bighas of land out of the permissible limit on the ground that it was an efficiently managed farm which satisfied the various requirements of clause (iv), sub -section (1) of section 32 -K. The Collector refused to determine this matter. An appeal was taken to the Commissioner but without success and a revision to the financial Commissioner was thrown out as incompetent. Having failed to achieve any redress, the petitioner moved the Pepsu Land Commission and asked them to advise the State Government with regard to the exemption claimed under section 32 -K. The Commission dismissed the application on the ground that it had no jurisdiction to entertain it. It is against this decision and against the decision of Collector and the authorities which have dismissed the appeal and the revision of the petitioner that the present petition is directed. The contention of the petitioner is that as soon as he made the claim before the Collector in proceedings under section 32 -C with regard to an exemption under section 32 -K, the Collector was bound to seek the advice of the Commission. He even goes further and maintains that the Commission was bound, when approached, to tender its advice at the instance of the petitioner. Before, examining the validity of these contentions, it will be proper to go into the scheme of the Act pertaining to the ceiling on the land. This matter is dealt with in Chapter IV -A of the Act. Section 32 -A provides that no person can own or possess land more than the permissible limit. The permissible limit is 30 standard acres or 80 ordinary acres in the case of persons who are not displaced from West Pakistan but it is 40 standard acres or 100 ordinary acres in the case of displaced persons. Section 32 -B requires that any person, who on the commencement of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Second Amendment) Act, 1956, owns or holds as landowner or tenant land under his personal cultivation, which in the aggregate exceeds the permissible limit, shall, within a period of one month from the commencement of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Amendment) Ordinance, 1958, furnish to the Collector a return giving the particulars of all his land in the prescribed form and manner and stating therein his selection of the parcel or parcels of land not exceeding in the aggregate the permissible limit which he desires to retain and the lands in respect of which he claims exemption from the ceiling under the provisions of Chapter IV -A. Section 32 -BB provides for declarations supported by affidavits to be furnished by certain landowners and tenants. This declaration is required where the landowner holds land in more than one Patwar circle. In the case of such a landowner, if he fails to furnish the required declaration, sub -section (2) of section 32 -BB provides a penalty that the Collector may direct all his holding, except 10 acres, to be surplus area, but this penalty does not take away his right to exemption permitted under section 32 -K. Section 32 -C provides for an eventuality where -under section 32 -B return has rot been filed. Section 32 -C is in these term : 32 -C. If any person owning or holding under his personal cultivation land in excess of the permissible limit fails to furnish the return and intimate his selection within the period prescribed under section 3 -B, the Collector may obtain the information required to be shown in the return through such agency as he may deem fit and, subject to the provisions of sub -section (2) of section 32 -BB, select the parcel or parcels of land which such person is entitled to retain under the provisions of this Act as also the surplus area of such person," and gives power to the Collector to collect information and subject to the provisions of sub -section (2) of section 32 BB, select the parcel or parcels of land which such person is entitled to retain under the provisions of this Act, and also the surplus area of such person. Here again the implication' is that the Collector has the power to cut down the permissible limit from 30 standard acres to 19 acres. So far as the present case is concerned, this has not been done. Section 32 -D provides for the submission of a statement to Government showing the total area owned by the landowner, the area which he may retain by way of his permissible area or exemption from ceiling and also the surplus area. The draft statement is also to include the advice of the Land Commissioner appointed under section 32 -P of the Act regarding the exemption from ceiling if claimed by the landowner. Any person who is aggrieved by the order of the Collector under subsection (2) of section 32 -D can prefer an appeal to the State Government or an Officer authorised by the State Government in that behalf. The power of revision is with the State Government under sub -section (4), and sub -section (6) provides that the draft statement shall be final in terms of the order of the Collector or the State Government as the case may be or in terms of the advice of the Land Commission regarding exemption from ceiling claimed by the landowner, if any. Chapter IV -B deals with the constitution of the Land Commission and the only provision in this Chapter is section 32 -P. Sub -Section (1) deals with the constitution of the Commission. Subsection (2] deals with the tenure of the Chairman and the members of the Commission. Sub -section (3) deals with the remunerations and sub -section (4) which deals with its duties is in these terms : 32 P(4). Subject to the provisions of this Act and in accordance with any rules which may be made by the State Government in this behalf, it shall be the duty of the Commission to - (a) determine fair rents for the purposes of section 32 -G; (b) determine the market value of any building, structure, tubewell under sub -section (4) of section 32 -G; (c) advise the State Government with regard to exemption of lands from the ceiling in accordance with the provisions of section 32 -K", Under sub -section (5), the advice tendered by the Commission is binding on the State Government and provides that no final statement shall be published in a case in which exemption is claimed under section 32 -K unless such advise is included therein.
(3.) THE short question that arises for determination is: What is the significance of the words "exemption from ceiling if claimed by the landowner under section 32 D(2)"? If reference is made to section 32 -D, it does require the landowner to make a claim with regard to exemption from ceiling under the provisions of this Chapter. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that "if claimed by the landowner is an expression wide enough to include claim made at any time before the Collector because it is the collector who, in the first instance, has to consider the claim made under section 32 -D. If I were to accept the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner then section 32 -B would become redundant because it provides that a claim has to be made within one month from the specified date under that section, that is, the commencement of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Amendment) Ordinance, 1958. This ordinance came into force on the 30th July, 1958. It is no doubt true that in the present case the claim under section 32 -K was made by the landowner when the Collector was determining the permissible area to be retained by the landowner under section 32 -C, and it is also of significance that before the Act was amended in 1962, as held by this Court, the Joint Hindu family could not be treated as one unit and in that state of law in view of the family partition, the petitioner was not required to submit his return under section 32 -B because he admittedly did not own land more than the permissible area. As in the case of determination of surplus area under section 32 -C, there seems to be no corresponding provision with regard to the determination of exemption under section 32 -K. The legislation is more or less in the nature of confiscatory legislation and the matter is not free from difficulty and would be arising frequently. It would, therefore, be proper that this petition is settled by a larger Bench because I am inclined to the view that the words "If claimed by the landowner" in section 32 -D are wide enough to include a claim made at any time before the draft statement. This construction I am particularly adopting because wherever the Legislature wanted to restrict the right given by the previous section, that section was specifically mentioned in the restrictive provision. I, therefore, direct that the pipers of this case be laid before my Lord the Chief Justice for constituting a larger Bench to decide this matter. ORDER OF THE DIVISION BENCH Shamsher Bahadur, J. (6th December, 1963) -This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India which has been placed for disposal before this Bench in consequence of the order of reference passed by Mahajan J. on 2nd of May, 1963, raises the question of construction of the words "if claimed by the landowner" occurring in section 32 -D of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955 (hereinafter called the Act). 6. The undisputed facts leading to the reference as also the relevant provisions of the Act may first be briefly narrated. Sampuran Singh petitioner considering that his holding of 77 standard acres and 4 units of land in village Naurana of Bhatinda telisil had been partitioned between him and his two sons did not deem it necessary to submit to the Collector any return under section 32 -B of the Act which requires any person owning or holding as landowner or tenant "land under his personal cultivation, which in the aggregate exceeds the permissible limit, to furnish a return" within a period of one month from the commencement of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Amendment) ordinance, 1958, in a form which is prescribed and in which it has to be mentioned what parcel or parcels of land of landowner would select for himself within the permissible limit and what exemptions he claims from the ceiling. The ceiling itself is stated to be the permissible limit under section 32 -A and a landowner or tenant under his personal cultivation is forbidden to own or hold an area in excess of it. The exemptions from ceiling are specified in section 32 -K and include, inter alia, at item (iv) "efficiently managed farms which consist of compact blocks on which heavy investment or permanent structural improvements have been made and whose break -up is likely to lead to a fall in production." The Collector, not having received the return from the petitioner under section 32 -B, proceeded to collect information for himself under section 32 -C which deals with a case where the person concerned "fails to furnish the return and intimate his selection within the period prescribed. The Collector in such an event is entitled to obtain the information which is otherwise required to be furnished in the return under section 32 -B through such agency as he deems fit. The Collector under section 32 -C, on collection of this information, is empowered to select the parcels of land which such person is entitled to retain under the provisions of this Act as also the surplus area of this person subject to the provisions of sub -section (2) of section 32 -BB.;