Rajesh Bindal, J. - (1.) The petitioners and their predecessor-in-interest having failed before the learned Single Judge have filed the present intra-court appeal.
(2.) The challenge before the learned Single Judge was to the order dated 20.3.1992, passed by the Financial Commissioner, exercising suomotu power while setting aside the order dated 15.4.1981 passed by the Prescribed Authority under the Punjab Security of Land Tenure Act, 1953.
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the predecessor-in-interest of the appellants-Kabiz Singh (deceased) was a big land owner of village Agondh, District Karnal. Vide order dated 24.1.1971, his 110 kanals and 13 marlas of land was declared surplus under the Act. Kabiz Singh died on 30.3.1975. His inheritance was sanctioned. Even though the land had been declared surplus but possession thereof was never taken from Kabiz Singh (deceased) or his successors-in-interest. After mutation of inheritance was sanctioned, his sons filed application on 11.8.1980 for re-computation of three separate units. The same was allowed vide order dated 15.4.1981 by the Prescribed Authority. At the time of hearing, the State was duly represented by Naib Tehsildar Agrarian. It was specifically noticed by the Prescribed Authority under the Act that the land though declared surplus in the hands of Kabiz Singh (deceased), but had not been utilised. Though the order passed by the Prescribed Authority was appealable under Section 18 of the Haryana Ceiling of the Land Holdings Act, 1972 (for short, 'the Act') to the Collector and further even revision before the Commissioner was also maintainable, but no remedy was availed of by the State against the same. The State filed revision before the Financial Commissioner after a gap of 11 years. The same was considered under Section 18 (6) of the Act by invoking suo-motu power and the order passed by the Prescribed Authority was set aside. The order was upheld by the learned Single Judge.;