Ajaib Singh vs Financial Commissioner and ors.

Amarjeet Chaudhary, J.

This order will dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 7153 and 7487 of 1987, involving identical questions of facts and law. For the purpose of the order, facts have been picked up from 7153 of 1987 Ajaib Singh v. Financial Commissioner, Revenue (Punjab).

The facts of the case are that respondents No. 2 to 6 filed a suit in the Court of Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Barnala, for ejectment of the petitioner from the land situated in village Barnala comprised in khasra Nos. 33/6/2/20, 7/80, 8/7/36, 14/80, 15/80, 16/411, 17/77, measuring 41 K. 7 Ms. under Section 77 of the Punjab Tenancy Act and Sections 7 and 8 of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act stating that tenant is cultivating the land as a tenant at will in lieu of Lagaan for the last more than three years and not paid the Lagaan for the crops Kharif 1980 and Rabi 1981. The Assistant Collector vide his order dated 1561982 Annexure P1 ordered the ejectment of the present petitioner Ajaib Singh. Aggrieved against this order, the tenant now petitioner filed appeal before Collector District Sangrur who also dismissed the same. The petitionertenant thereafter approached the Commissioner Patiala Division and Financial Commissioner (Revenue) Punjab who vide orders dated 6.5.1986 and 27.8.1987 respectively confirmed the order passed by Assistant Collector, Ist Grade Barnala and that passed by Collector, Sangrur. The petitioner now has come to this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the above said orders, Annexures P1 to P4.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not violated the terms of tenancy and had been paying the Lagaan regularly but the petitioner along with other have been evicted simply on the plea that the petitioner is cultivating the land since 1976 i.e., more than three years. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also contended that the respondentlandlord has not been shown to be a small landowner nor has the land in question been shown to be a part of his permissible area. Reference was made to a Full Bench decision of this Court in Piara Singh v. Financial Commissioner, Revenue, Punjab, 1977 PLJ 151 to contend that the respondentlandlord, was not competent to seek ejectment under Section 8 and 7 of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955.

The stand taken by the respondents is that Section 8 of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955 as amended by the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Second Amendment) Act, 1956, provides an independent ground of eviction and a tenant inducted after the enforcement of the Amended Act, 1956, can be ejected after the expiry of three years without proving any of the conditions specified in Section 7 of the Act. Since the petitioner was holding the land for more than three years, he could be ejected in view of the aforesaid provisions of the Act, Counsel for the respondents also relied upon Piara Singh''s case (supra).

After giving my thoughtful consideration to the entire matter, I am of the view that a specific plea was raised that the respondents landlord have not been shown to be small land owners nor has the land in question been shown to be a part of their permissible area but the authorities did not record any finding in that respect. Otherwise also, the law is well settled by this Court in Piara Singh''s case (supra) wherein it was held that a big landowner can avail of provisions of Section 8 of the Act for the ejectment of the tenant from his reserved area and a small landowner can also equally avail of the ground as given in Section 8 for the ejectment of the tenant.

For the reasons aforesaid, the impugned order Annexure P1 to P4 are quashed and the case is remanded to Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Barnala, who shall decide the case in the light of the observations made above, within six months.

Parties to appear before Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Barnala, on 22.4.1991.

There will be no order as to costs.