Mahajan, J. - (1.) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the order of the Pepsu Land Commission rejecting the claim of the Petitioners to exemption under Section 32 K (vi) of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955 The exemption was claimed on the ground of the orchard having been planted within two years from the commencement of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Second Amendment) Act, 1956. It is common ground that these two years expired on 31st August, 1958. The Petitioner's case was that they had planted the orchard within the target date and that the same had died out. They were in the process of replenishing the same and, therefore, in view of my decision reported in Phul Chand v. The State, I.L.R. (1962) P&H 639, decided on 3rd April, 1962 the order of the Pepsu Land Commission should be quashed. Mr. Sikri who appears for the State relies on the amendment made to Section 32 -K by the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Second Amendment) Act 1962 (Punjab Act 27 of 1962) Section 5 of this Act amends Section 32 -K. The amendment which is relevant in our purpose is as follows: 5. In Section 32 -K of the principal Act, after Sub -section (2), the following Sub -sections shall be added, namely: - (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, - (a) the exemption specified in Clause (vi) of Sub -section (1) shall not be allowed unless the orchard planted within the period specified therein is found to be an orchard also at the time of granting the exemption;
(2.) Section 1(2) of the amending Act provides that Section 5 shall be deemed to have come into force on the 30th day of October, 1956. Therefore, it was incumbent on the Petitioner to prove to the satisfaction of the Commission that the orchard was planted within the target date, that is, 31st August, 1958. and that it is existing at the time when the Commission is considering the question of exemption. The second requirement is lacking in this case. That being so, there is no merit in this petition. The same fails and is dismissed, but there will be no order as to costs.;