- (1.) The land involved in this petition belongs to Sanu and Raffo. They filed a suit under the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887 , and the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade, decreed the suit and ordered eviction of Rallu, the tenant. This decision was upheld by the Collector on appeal. Rallu then filed a revision petition and the Commissioner, Jullundur Division, recommended to the Financial Commissioner that the order passed by the Collector be set aside because a suit for eviction of a tenant after the enactment of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 was not competent. This recommendation, however, was not accepted by the Additional Financial Commissioner who upheld the order of eviction. Aggrieved against this order, Rallu has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution to get the orders made under the Punjab Tenancy Act, quashed.
(2.) Admittedly Section 14-A was added to the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act in 1955 and this provision came into force on 20th May, 1955. The suit for petitioner's eviction was filed on 1st June, 1955. The question arises whether this suit was competent. Section 14-A so far as it is relevant for the present case reads :- "Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law for the time being in force, and subject to the provisions of Section 9-A, - (a) a landowner desiring to eject a tenant under this Act shall apply in writing to the Assistant Collector, First Grade, having jurisdiction, who shall thereafter proceed as provided for in sub-section (2) of Section 10 of this Act, and the provisions of sub-section (3) of the said section shall also apply in relation to such application." Sub-section (2) of Section 10 lays down that the proceedings will be taken summarily and only a memorandum of evidence would be kept. Sub-section (3) of Section 10, reads :- "When an application has been made, any proceedings in relation to the same matter pending in any other Court or before any other authority shall be stayed on receipt of information by that Court or authority from such Assistant Collector of the fact of having received the application, and all such proceedings in a Court or before any authority shall lapse when the dispute has been determined by the Assistant Collector acting under this Act." At this stage it would be convenient to refer to Section 24 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act which provides that provisions regarding appeal, review and revision will be the same as provided in Sections 80 to 84 of the Punjab Tenant Act, 1887.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner urged that from these provisions it is quite clear that after the enactment of Section 14-A, proceedings for eviction can be taken only under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act and not under the Punjab Tenancy Act. I am unable to accept this contention. It will be noticed that proceedings for eviction of tenants under the Punjab Tenancy Act as well as under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act lie to the same officers and the only difference is that under latter Act proceedings are summary. The provisions relating to appeal, review and revision are common to both proceedings. Sub-section (3) of Section 10 lays down that if an application is made under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, then proceedings pending anywhere else would be stayed. It, therefore, follows that if the landlord had made an application under Section 14-A of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, then information would have been sent to the authority under the Punjab Tenancy Act, to stay further proceedings. Filing of a petition under Section 14-A does not, therefore, result in automatic abatement of the previous proceedings taken under the Punjab Tenancy Act. Taking this circumstance into consideration I am of the opinion that it is open to the landlord to take proceedings either under the Punjab Tenancy Act or under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act. The remedies available to him are parallel and it is open to him to avail of either remedy. There is nothing in Section 14-A or other provisions of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act which can lead one to infer that the legislature intended impliedly to bar the landlord's remedy to seek eviction of his tenant under the Punjab Tenancy Act.;