B.C.MISRA, J. - (1.)This order will dispose of two writ petitions (Civil Writs Nos. 564-D and 565-D of 1963). They have been filed by the same parties and arise under the same circiumstances aggrieved by the same order 01 the learned Chief Commissioner (now known as Lieutenant Governor). For the sake of convenience, the facts are taken from the first mentioned writ petition. This has been filed by Narinder Singh who is son of Bhagwan Singh deceased (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) and who is the brother of respondents Nos. 3 and 4. The main contestant in this writ petition is Khaliqur-Rehman, respondent No. 1 and Saidur-Rehman who is the contesting respondent in the second mentioned writ petition along with other legal representatives of their deceased father Syed Abdul Latif. It appears that one Aziz-ur-Rehman, predecessor of the contesting respondent, was the owner of the land in dispute and in 1948 he entered into a partnership with Bhagwan Singh deceased and another. Eventually on 6th May. 1953, Aziz-ur-Rehman, owner, entered into an agreement to sell the land in dispute to Bhagwan Singh deceased. Some part of the land measuring about 4300 square yards was sold to the deceased by Aziz-ur-Rehman, owner, but that land is not in dispute before us. According to the contentions of the petitioner, his predecessor the deceased, entered into the possession of the land in pursuance of the agreement to sell and was recorded in the revenue papers after Kharif 1953 and on the enforcement of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954, Bhagwan Singh deceased was declared a Bhumidar and on 24th June, 1959 he was granted a certificate of Bhumidari It is also mentioned in the writ petition that on 24th April, 1957, Khaliq-ur-Rehman entered into an agreement of partnership with the deceased in respect of the land in dispute in order to exclude it from the operation of the Land Reforms Act. It is also contended that the said agreement was ineffectual in law. Two other facts are mentioned in the writ petition which are not material for the decision of this writ petition. They are that on 22nd November. 1967, Jalil-ur-Rehman etc. legal representatives of Aziz-ur-Rehman. entered into an agreement with H. R. Mittal in respect of some land which led to litigation in a Civil Court and ended against the said transferee of land. The other fact is that Khaliq-ur-Rehman on 31st August, 1959. filed a suit against the declaration of Bhumidari rights to the deceased which was still pending.
(2.)The material fact, however, is that on 18th September. 1959, Khaliq-ur-Rehman filed a petition for revision under Section 187 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act in the Court of the Chief Commissioner, Delhi against the order of the Revenue Assistant dated 24th June, 1959, in which he claimed one-fourth share of the land in dispute as heir of Aziz-ur-Rehman. deceased owner. On 25th March,. 1960 the other contesting respondent Said-ur-Rehman also filed a similar revision petition. These revisions were disposed of by the learned Chief Commissioner by a common order dated 8th February, 1963. By this order he came to the conclusion that the entry on which. reliance had been placed on behalf of the deceased Bhagwan Singh was dubious, if not altogether false and it did not showthe deceased Bhagwan Singh as nonoccupancy tenant and he, therefore, set aside the order granting Bhumidari certificate to Bhagwan Singh.
(3.)The petitioner in the-writ petition has contended that aggrieved by this order he filed a petition on 5th April, 1963; under Article 226 of the Constitution in the Circuit Bench of the High Court of Punjab at Delhi which came up for preliminary hearing before R. P. Khosla. and I. D. Dua, JJ. and that it was dismissed in limine. Subsequently the petitioner filed a petition for review beforethe learned Chief Commissioner on 3rd May, 1963 which was dismissed by order dated 4th May, 1963. The petitioner inboth the writ petitions has challenged; the legality and validity of the two orders of the Chief Commissioner mentioned above.