Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, where a tenant sought to purchase land he had been cultivating for over six years. The landowner, a big landlord, opposed the purchase on the ground that the land was part of his reserved area. The Assistant Collector allowed the purchase, finding that the land was not reserved. The Collector dismissed the landowner's appeal. During revision before the Commissioner, the landowner raised a new plea that the entire land was part of his permissible area selected under Section 5B of the Act, based on a recent decision by the Financial Commissioner in another case. The Commissioner recommended that the revision be accepted, but the Financial Commissioner dismissed it, holding that the landowner could not raise this new plea at that stage. The High Court allowed the landowner's writ petition, directing the Financial Commissioner to accept the Commissioner's recommendation. The tenant appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that the question whether the land is part of the reserved or selected area is a jurisdictional fact under Section 18. The Assistant Collector must decide this before determining the value, and a wrong decision cannot confer jurisdiction. The Financial Commissioner, under Section 24 read with Section 84 of the Tenancy Act, has wide revisional powers akin to the High Court and can examine jurisdictional facts even if raised for the first time. The Court set aside the High Court's order and remanded the matter to the Financial Commissioner to determine whether the selection was made in time and was genuine and valid.
Headnote
A) Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 - Section 18 - Jurisdictional Fact - The question whether the land sought to be purchased by a tenant is included in the reserved or selected area of the landowner is a jurisdictional fact. The Assistant Collector must go into this question before determining the value; a wrong decision on this point cannot confer jurisdiction. Held that the Financial Commissioner should have considered this plea on merits. (Paras Not mentioned) B) Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 - Section 24 - Revisional Power - Under Section 24 read with Section 84 of the Tenancy Act, the Financial Commissioner has the same revisional power as the High Court and can examine whether the Assistant Collector or Collector rightly assumed jurisdiction. The revisional authority can go into jurisdictional questions even if not raised earlier. (Paras Not mentioned) C) Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 - Section 5B - Selection as Permissible Area - A selection by a landowner under Section 5B for permissible area has the same force as reservation under Section 5 and disentitles the tenant from purchasing such land. The Financial Commissioner must determine whether the selection was made in time and was genuine and valid. (Paras Not mentioned)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Financial Commissioner should have allowed the landowner to raise the plea of selection at the revisional stage, and whether the question of land being part of the reserved or selected area is a jurisdictional fact that can be examined by the revisional authority.
Final Decision
Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court order, and remanded the matter to the Financial Commissioner to determine whether the landowner's selection was made in time and was genuine and valid. The Financial Commissioner was directed to decide the revision on merits after considering the selection plea.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Jurisdictional fact
- reserved or selected area
- revisional power of Financial Commissioner
- Section 18 of Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act
- Section 24
- tenant's right to purchase
- selection under Section 5B has same force as reservation
