RAJIVE BHALLA,J. - (1.) THE petitioners pray for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for setting aside the orders, dated 20.1.1983 (Annexure P-2) and 6.8.1985 (Annexure P-3), passed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division and the Financial Commissioner, Haryana, Chandigarh respectively.
(2.) THE petitioners are the successors-in-interest of Smt. Shiv Kori, a big landowner as prescribed under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (for short herein after referred to as "the Punjab Act"). The surplus area case of Smt. Shiv Kori was decided on 19.12.1959 and an area measuring 10 standard acres 8-3/4 units was declared surplus. As consolidation proceedings intervened, Smt. Shiv Kori applied for demarcation of her permissible and surplus area. Vide order, dated 3.3.1967, the Circle Revenue Officer demarcated the permissible and surplus area but inadvertently included the area sold by Smt. Shiv Kori, in her surplus area. Respondents Nos. 4 to 11, the vendees from Smt. Shiv Kori, approached the Collector for rectification of this error. Vide order, dated 12.2.1970, the Collector excluded the area, purchased by respondents Nos. 4 to 11, from the surplus area. Smt. Shiv Kori filed an appeal against the order, dated 12.2.1970 before the Commissioner, Ambala Division. The Commissioner, Ambala Division accepted the appeal, vide order, dated 10.5.1978 and remitted the matter to the Collector for a fresh adjudication. The Collector thereafter passed an order, dated 29.12.1981 holding that as the sale in favour of respondents Nos. 4 to 11 was effected before 30.7.1958, the vendees were entitled to the benefit of Section 8 of the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 (for short herein after referred to as "the Haryana Act") and, therefore, their land had to be excluded, while computing the land holding of Smt. Shiv Kori.
(3.) DURING the pendency of these proceedings, one Amir Singh respondent No. 12, (since deceased, and now represented by his L.Rs), filed an application claiming that he was a sitting tenant over Khasra Nos. 48/24, 23, 18, 19/1, 12 and 17, and was, therefore, entitled to the land comprising his tenancy. The Collector rejected his claim. Aggrieved by this order, Amir Singh filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Ambala Division. Vide order, dated 20.1.1983, the Commissioner held that the land, subject matter of the sale deed, dated 29.1.1958, could not be excluded, as respondents Nos. 4 to 11 were not entitled to the benefit of Section 8 of the Haryana Act. The petitioners thereafter filed a revision before the Financial Commissioner, Haryana Chandigarh, which was dismissed.;