C.W.P. No.1054 of 1992 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.1054 of 1992 Date of Decision : 20.04.2011 Ranjit Singh and others …Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI -.- Present: Mr. R.K. Joshi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.S. Chandumajra, D.A.G., Punjab. Mr. N.D. Kalra, Advocate for respondent No.4. *** AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL) This petition has been filed challenging the orders of the Financial Commissioner dated 23.08.1990 (Annexure P-1) and the Chief Settlement Commissioner dated Nil (Annexure P-2). The issue relates to the allotment of land to one Puran Singh and the subsequent sale made by him in favour of the C.W.P. No.1054 of 1992 -2- petitioners. The main plank of the argument of the petitioners is that notwithstanding the right or claim of aforesaid Puran Singh they are protected under Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act (for brevity ‘the Act’) being bona fide purchasers for consideration. The Tehsildar (Rehabilitation & Sales) had made a reference for cancelling the propriety rights of aforesaid Puran Singh. That recommendation was accepted by the Chief Settlement Commissioner who however remanded the case back to the Tehsildar (Rehabilitation & Sales) to examine the issue of the entitlement of the protection under Section 41 of the Act claimed by the petitioners to be decided after giving opportunity to all the parties to lead their evidence. In a revision, the learned Financial Commissioner summarily rejected the claim of the petitioners for protection under Section 41 of the Act. In my opinion, the order of the learned Financial Commissioner is indefensible while that of the Chief Settlement Commissioner is well considered. It was not open to the learned Financial Commissioner to dismiss the claim of the petitioners only on the ground that they had purchased the property from an imposter. The approach of the Chief Settlement Commissioner was more balanced. In the circumstances, I set aside the order of the learned Financial Commissioner dated 23.08.1990 (Annexure P-1) and restore the order of the Chief Settlement Commissioner (Annexure C.W.P. No.1054 of 1992 -3- P-2). The matter is consequently remanded to the Tehsildar (Rehabilitation & Sales), Gurdaspur who would decide the issue regarding the protection of Section 41 of the Act claimed by the petitioners under the provision of the Punjab Package Deal Properties (Disposal) Act, 1976 and the rules framed there under. Parties through counsel are directed to appear before the Tehsildar (Rehabilitation & Sales), Gurdaspur on 01.06.2011. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. ( AJAY TEWARI ) April 20, 2011 JUDGE ashish