BHOPINDER SINGH DHILLON, J. - (1.) PETITIONER Soni Bai owned no land on the date of enforcement of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act. 1953 (Punjab Act X of 1953) Thereinafter referred to as the Act), Her mother Smt. Parmcshwari Bai died on December 8, 1955 and the petitioner inherited 6 Standard Acres and 8 1/4 Units of land on her death. Smt. Jamni Bai aunt of the petitioner gifted 26 Stand-dard Acres and 1 1/2 Units of land to the petitioner on September 7. 1957. The petitioner thus became owner of 32 Standard Acres and 9 3/4 Units of land. She reserved the area for her self-cultivation and filed her choice in form 'e' as required under Section 5 (B) read with Section 19 (B) of the Act, read with the provisions of Punjab Security of Land Tenures Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) on August 28. 1958 within the prescribed period. However, on September 12. 1960. the Kanungo concerned reported that the petitioner was the owner of 32 Standard Acres and 9 1/2 Units of land whereas she was entitled to retain 50 Standard Acres as permissible area and thus she had nq surplus area. Collector Bhiwani. vide his order dated September 16. 1960. copy of which is attached as An-nexure 'b' with the writ petition, held that since the petitioner owned less than 50 Standard Acres of land and she was an allottee, therefore, she was a small landowner and no further proceedings are required to be taken for declaring any of the portion of her land as surplus.
(2.) SURJA respondent was a tenant of the land under the petitioner. He filed an application under Section 1'8 of the Act for the purchase of the land under his tenancv- The petitioner also filed a petition for ejectment of Suria. The petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed whereas the application for purchase filed by Suria respondent was allowed on June 19, 1967. Both these petitions were decided vide same order referred to above. The petitioner filed two aopeals. one challenging the grant of proprietary rights to Surja respondent and the other challenging the order of the Assistant Collector rejecting the application for ejectment. The Collector, vide his order dated February 20, 1968. copy of which is Annexure 'e' with the writ petition, accepted both the appeals and remanded the case. He held that the landowner had made a request for selection in time but Special Collector did not prepare statement in form 'f' after complying with Rule 6 (6) of the Rules. He directed the Collector to Pass fresh orders about the permissible area of the petitioner. Surja respondent feeling aggrieved against this order, filed an appeal before the Commissioner. Ambala Division. Ambala. which was dismissed by the Additional Commissioner, Ambala. vide his order dated August 23, 1968. copy of which if Annexure 'f' with the writ petition. Consequently, due to remand order. on March 12. 1969. the Collector Surplus Area. Bhiwani. passed an order, copy of which is Annexure 'g' with the writ petition, holding that the petitioner was a big landowner and declared 12. 75 ordinary Acres as surplus area in her hands. He did not allow the petitioner to select her permissible area afresh but held that since she had selected more than 60 ordinarv Acres, therefore, her selected area for self cultivation is being made good by excluding the area under the old tenants and the purchased area. He did not give the landowner fresh opportunity to make selection/reservation. This order of the Collector was challenged in appeal by the Petitioner before the Commissioner, Ambala Division. Ambala. who dismissed the appeal vide his order dated August 22, 1969 copy of which is Annex. 'k' with the writ petition. The revision petition filed by the petitioner before the learned Financial Commissioner was also dismissed by him vide his order dated Oct. 21, 1969. copy of which is Annexure 'm' with the writ petition. The present writ petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India was filed by the petitioner on Jan. 24, 1970 challenging the orders of the Collector, Commissioner and Financial Commissioner, An-nexures 'g', 'k' and 'm' with the writ petition, respectively.
(3.) THIS petition came up for hearing on January 25, 1972. before R. P. Narula, J. (as he then was) and in view of the importance of the auestion of law arising for the decision of the case, this petition was referred to a larger Bench and this is how this petition is before us.;