On March 3, 1958, Respondent No.
1, as on the crucial date i.e. 15 4 1953, these lands were in the occupation of tenants whose total holdings did number exceed the permissible limit That the Commissioner erred In himself calling and examining the Khasra Girdawri, and then without even examining the Patwari who had made the entries therein, in holding, on mere companyjectures, that the record had been tampered with.
On the same date, Respondent No.
In 1964, the Circle Revenue Officer started proceedings for determination of the surplus area The village Patwari prepared the necessary statement in Form D relating to all the lands held by Respondent No.
A third sale was also made of 17 Bighas and 16 Biswas of land, situate in Dewan Khera, by Respondent No.
16,000/ .
1 herein owned 186 standard acres and 4 1/2 units of agricultural land at the time of the companymencement of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 Act X of 1953 hereafter called the Act , in several villages in the State of Punjab.
On 15 9 1964, the Collector made an order declaring 155 standard acres and 12 3/4 units of land as surplus area of Respondent No.
In this Form, he also showed appellants as transferees of a part of that area, from Respondent No.
Against that order, the appellants preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, who dismissed it on November 6, 1955.
1 sold 76 Bighas and 13 Biswas of land situate in the area of village Dewan Khera for Rs.
Mutations in favour of the vendees appellants on the basis of the sales were sanctioned by the Revenue Officer companycerned in 1958.
Thereafter, he transferred part of his land in favour of his sons, Respondents 2 and 3.
Hearing at the appellate stage was numbersubstitute for hearing at the original enquiry.
80,000/ to the appellants.
The Commissioner might to have remanded the case to the Collector and thus afforded the appellants an opportunity to lead evidence to rebut the erroneous view of the Commissioner endorsed in revision by the Financial Commissioner That Respondent 1 had represented that he would get the lands sold to the appellants included in his permissible area which had number been reserved or selected by him within the prescribed period.
The land owners had number made any reservation in 1953 or selection in 1958 of their permissible area.
4,000/ to the appellants.
The appellants revision before the Financial Commissioner, also met the same fate on March 3, 1966.
2 sold 3 Bighas and 6 Biswas of land in the same village, for Rs.
3 in favour of the appellants for Rs.
Most of the area thus transferred by Respondents 1 to 3 in favour of the appellants, was on 15 4 1953 i.e. at the companymencement of the Act under tenants who had numberother land in any capacity in the State of Punjab.
1, as on 15 4 1953.
The Collector therefore should have included these lands in the permissible area of Respondent 1.
S. Sarkaria, J. This appeal by certificate is directed against the order dated the 3rd August, 1966 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissing the appellants writ petition in limine.
The facts as alleged in the writ petition are as under Respondent No.
