IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.3280 of 1985 (O&M) Date of decision:30.11.2011 Dharam Singh ...Petitioner versus The State of Punjab, through the Secretary Revenue, Civil Secretariat, Chandigarh, and others. ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. G.S.Jaswal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Navdeep Sukhna, DAG, Punjab, for respondents 1 to 5. Mr. R.S.Sihota, Senior Advocate, with Mr. B.R. Rana, Advocate, and Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate, for respondents 6 and 7. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? No. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? No. ---- K.Kannan, J. 1. This case has had a long and checkered history. The proceedings that were initiated under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act of 1953 in determining the size of holding of the landowner has been mired in a litigation for over four decades. In all this dispensation, it pays a landowner to litigate so long as he Civil Writ Petition No.3280 of 1985 (O&M) - 2 - continues in possession with interim orders. The law itself is such that till the determination by the Collector becomes final in relation to landlord's holding and the surplus utilized any change in the composition of family by death on the last male owner goes to be benefit of the family, for, in such a situation there has to be a redetermination making provision for inheritance of the legal heirs. In this case, the landowner has died and in terms of law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Sardara Singh and others Versus The Financial Commissioner and others-2008(2) RCR (Civil) 744, a fresh determination has become necessary. The impugned order would require to be set aside and the matter put to the Collector on this simple ground. There are, however, several disputed factual questions which are again challenged in the writ petition. If the remand were to be made without adjudicating on those issues, it will again give rise to a scope for raking up all those undecided issues. I would, therefore, limit the scope of enquiry for redetermination only as regards the holding that would go to decide the scope and effect of inheritance and conclude other contentious issues through the order. 2. The writ petition challenges the final determination as effected by the Financial Commissioner (Taxation), Punjab, on 23.01.1985. The determination was in respect of the holding of one Dharam Singh, who was a displaced person from the place now in Pakistan. 60 standard acres and 5 units had been allotted by the Civil Writ Petition No.3280 of 1985 (O&M) - 3 - Rehabilitation Department in the year 1949 in various villages of District Hoshiarpur. After consolidation proceedings, the Collector processed the case of Dharam Singh and declared the surplus under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act of 1953 on 21.04.1960. At every level of determination by way of challenges to appeal, revision and further revision, the case remained pending all along and the last of such determination took place when the Additional Commissioner by his order dated 19.02.1979 declared an area of 9 standard acres and 8 ¼ units as surplus.The Financial Commissioner was alive to the issue that there had been too many appraisals and fresh reappraisals and since the landowner had an issue on every aspect of category of land and the manner of determination on factual issues, he obtained certified true copies of all relevant and authenticated revenue records, sought clarification on the relevant points mentioned in the intermediary orders and concluded several points on irrefutable facts. They were: (i) the allotment to Dharam Singh was 60 standard acres and 5 units and not 60 standard acres and 6 units as claimed by him; (ii) the consolidation proceedings with respect to the land in the year 1953-54 made possible the extent of holding to be assessed at 65 standard acres and 7 units in view of the changes in classification; (iii) certain portion of the property allotted had been cancelled by the Rehabilitation Department to the extent of 5 standard acres and 5 ¼ units; (iv) a property held by Dharam Singh to an extent of 9 ¼ units were comprised in orchard and Civil Writ Petition No.3280 of 1985 (O&M) - 4 - hence, excludible from the total area; (v) after exclusion of the property which was cancelled by the Rehabilitation Department and taking the extent used as orchard, the remaining extent of land worked to 59 standard acres and 8 ¼ units; (vi) for the permissible area of 50 standard acres for a displaced person, the remaining extent of property was 9 standard acres and 8 ¼ units. This determination has been made by the Financial Commissioner after verification of all authenticated records and I, therefore, find that the decision of the Collector declaring 9 standard acres and 8 ¼ units could not faulted. 3. Before this Court, the counsel for the petitioner still has grievance to the effect that (i) Banjar Qadim lands ought to have been excluded but they were not done; (ii) the valuation of rehabilitation rates shall prevail and not the consolidation rates; (iii) there had been a cancellation of allotment to the portion and the declaration of surplus area should be taken into account only after appropriate deduction for such cancellation. I am not prepared to examine any ground than what has been considered by the authority. The pure disputed questions of fact cannot be a matter of adjudication before this Court. A fresh redetermination cannot reopen the issues which was concluded already by the Financial Commissioner. The total holding must only be taken as 59 standard acres and 8 ¼ units and a redetermination shall be done on that basis, treating the said extent as falling to succession on the heirs of Civil Writ Petition No.3280 of 1985 (O&M) - 5 - the deceased land owner. The matter is remitted to the Collector, Hoshiarpur for redetermination in accordance with law. 4. The writ petition is disposed of as above. 30.11.2011 (K. KANNAN) sanjeev JUDGE