MANI RAM AND ORS. Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will dispose of three petitions, Civil Writ No. 1077 of 1967, Mani Ram and Ors. v. The Financial Commissioner and Anr. Civil Writ No. 1320 of 1967 and Civil Writ No. 2957 of 1967 Dal Sukh. Ors. v. The State of Haryana and Ors. as common questions of law and fact arise in all these petitions. Civil Writ and Civil Writ No. 1320 of 1967 are directed against the order of the Financial Commissioner, Haryana, dated 16th March, 1967, holding that there was no excess areo with Shrimati Budho Bai, Respondent No. (2) Civil Writ No. 2957 of 1967 is directed against the order of the Financial Commissioner, Haryana, dated 24th October, 1967, holding that the Petitioners in that writ petition, who are the tenants of Shrimati Budho Bai, are not entitled' to purchase the land in their tenancy.

(2.) SHRIMATI Budho Bai, Respondent No. 2, is a displaced person from Pakistan and was allotted 43 standard acres 10 3/4 units of land in village Talwara Khurd in lieu of the land left in Pakistan. On the 15th of April, 1953, the date of commencement of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (hereinafter called the Act), the land was evaluated as 49.01 standard acres. It was contended by the Petitioners, who are the tenants of Shrimati Budho Bai, that she was not a small land -owner on the 15th of April, 1953, when the Act came into force, as her permissible area was 43 standard acres 10 3/4 units which was allotted to her. The area in her possession on the 15th of April, 1953 was more than the permissible area which took her out of the category of small land -owners. She did not, admittedly, reserve any area on the ground that she was a small land -owner. Proceedings for declaring surplus area were taken and the Collector, Surplus Area, Sirsa, by order dated 12th October, 1965, declared 1.13 standard acres of land as surplus area. Shrimati Budho Bai filed an appeal against that order which was accepted by the Commissioner, Ambala Division January 11, 1967. The Petitioners filed a revision against the order of the learned Commissioner before the Financial Commissioner which was dismissed on 16th March, 1967.

(3.) THE only point arising for decision in the case is as to what area is Shrimati Budho Bai entitled as her permissible area. The facts are not in dispute, that is, she had been originally allotted 43 standard acres 10J units and when this land was evaluated, as on 15th April, 1953, the area worked out to 49.01 standard acres. The area did not increase because of any subsequent acquisitions made by Shrimati Budho Bai in any manner but because of the fact that by improvements and good husbandry, the yield from the lands became higher with the result that although physically the area of the land did not increase but nationally on the value of the yield, the land allotted to her became larger in area in standard acres. The learned Financial Commissioner has held that a landowner cannot be penalized for having improved his land and the increase due to the land -owner's own efforts, without any addition having been made to the land physically, the land -owner cannot be deprived of any part of the land. Permissible area has been defined in Section 2(3) of the Act as under: