Amrik Singh vs State of Punjab

D.S. Tewatia, J. (Oral)

The petitioners claim themselves to be in cultivating possession of some land forming part of the Package Deal property and belonging to the State, which formed part of the river bed. When they stood possession thereof, it was Banjar Qadim subject to river action, and they invested huge amount in making in cultivable. They have averred in the petition that they had made applications for the transfer of the land under their cultivation in terms of section 3 of the Punjab Package Deal Properties (Disposal) Act, 1976. On being served with Demand Notices under section 5 of the said Act read with rule 15 of the Punjab Package Deal Properties (Disposal) Rules, 1976, they are said to have approached the Tehsildarcum Managing Officer, Zira, respondent No. 3, and represented to him that they were not liable to pay the amount mentioned in the Demand Notices. When they came to know that their warrants of arrest had been issued, they approached this Court through the present petition, wherein, interalia, the petitioners have averred that the amount mentioned in the Demand Notices was much higher than under the rules it could have been assessed to; that the Tehsildarcum Managing Officer was not entitled to assess the same, as only Tehsildar (Sales) could do so; and that, in any case, TehsildarcumManaging Officer had made the assessment without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

In the written statement filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 3, the allegation that the assessment order had been passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners has not been denied. Rule 15 of the rules in question clearly envisages that no order shall be passed without affording an opportunity of hearing. In the written statement, the said rule has been quoted without mentioning the proviso. Relevant portion of rule 15 is in the following terms :

``15. Where Tehsildar (Sales) or Naib Tehsildar (Sales) is satisfied that any person is or has, at any time, been in unauthorised occupation of any land or property, to which he was not entitled or which was in excess of that to which he was entitled, then, without prejudice to any other action, which may be taken against that person, he, may assess the damages on the principles specified below :

(i) In case of rural property which is agricultural land, the damages shall be assessed and recovered at 20 times the land revenue or Rs. 40/ per acre per harvest whichever is higher; .......:

Provided that no such assessment shall be made without giving to the person concerned a reasonable opportunity of being heard.''''

A perusal of the aforesaid rule clearly shows that an assessment order has to be passed after affording an opportunity of hearing to the unauthorised occupants in question. That having not been done, the assessment order, if any, and the Demand Notices issued on the strength of the same are illegal having been passed in violation of rule 15. The impugned Demand Notices are, therefore, quashed and the Tehsildar (Sales), Zira, is directed to make a fresh assessment order after affording due opportunity to the petitioners. The petition is allowed with no order as to costs.