ARMY INSTITUTE OF LAW

EVALUATION OF PUNJAB LAND REFORMS

Submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for BA.LL.B. degree

Submitted To: Submitted by:

Mrs. Kirandeep Kaur, Tulip Joshi

Asst Prof. of Land Laws 1405(Sec-A)

1
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I, would like to express my deepest gratitude to Mrs. Kirandeep Kaur, Assistant Professor of
Law, for her kind support and guidance. She has helped me in making this project through
enlightening me on this topic. I am really thankful to her for cooperating with me I have learnt
a lot through my project.

2
 INDEX OF CASES
1. Ajmer Singh v. State of Punjab, 1979 PLJ 316(P&H)
2. Akhara Braham Buta v. Shri Inderjit (since dead) Rep. By his L.Rs 1991 PLJ 503
3. Bharat Singh v. Union of India, 1982 LLR 644 (P&H)
4. Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab, 1986 PU 183 (FCP)
5. Gurdial Singh v. State of Punjab, 1983 RLJ 485 (FCP)
6. Hakumat Rai vs State of Punjab, 1980 PLJ 556
7. Harnek Singh v. Financial Commissioner, Appeals, Punjab, 2002(1) RCR(Civil) 127
(SC)
8. Inder Singh v. State of Punjab, 1978 RCR 566 (P&H)
9. Jagir Singh v. State of Punjab 1981 RLR 22 (P&H)
10. Jagraj Singh v. State of Punjab, 1978 PLJ 59 (DB)
11. Jaswant Singh v. Punjab Government , 1993(3) RRR 501(P&H)
12. Kaka Singh v. State of Punjab, 1982 PU 484
13. Karnail Singh v. State of Punjab and Others, 1989 P13 95
14. Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, 1984(1) LLR 251 (FCP)
15. Kulbir Singh v. Commissioner (Appeals), Jalandhar 1985 PU 399 (FCP).
16. Malkiat Singh v. State of Punjab., 1977 PIJ 126 (FCP).
17. Mangat Ram v. Financial Commissioner., Revenue, Haryana 1994(2) RRR 612
(P&H),
18. Munshi Ram v. The Financial Commitioner, Haryana ,1979 PLJ 182
19. Tukka Ram v. Sood, 1993 (1) RRR 7.
20. Malkiat Singh v. State of Punjab, 1977 PLJ (FCP)
21. Ranjit Ram v. Financial Commissioner, Revenue, Punjab and others , 1981 PLJ 259
22. State of Punjab v Sucha Singh, 1977 PLJ 139.
23. State of Punjab v. Sanjiv Kumar, 1977 PLJ 139
24. Sucha Singh v. State of Punjab 1974 PLJ 168
25. Udham Kaur and others v. State of Punjab, 1991(1) RRR 162 (FCP)

3
 INDEX
Sno. TOPIC Pg.
1 HISTORY OF PUNJAB LAND REFORMS 5-6
2 THE PUNJAB LAND REFORMS ACT, 1972 6-8
 NATURE AND OBJECT
 INCONSISTENCIES WITH OTHER ACTS
 CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY AND

RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT OF THE ACT

3 DEFINITIONS UNDER THIS ACT 8

 DETERMINATION OF SURPLUS AREAS BY

THE COLLECTOR AND HIS POWERS UNDER

 VESTING OF UNUTILIZED SURPLUS AREA IN

 AMOUNT PAYABLE FOR THE SURPLUS AREA

EXCESS OF PERMISSIBLE AREA

5 EXEMPTIONS 15-16
 EXEMPTION OF LANDS BELONGING TO

RELIGIOUS OR CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS

 EXEMPTION OF CERTAIN LANDS FROM THE

OPERATION OF THE ACT

6 CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS 16

7 BIBLIOGRAPHY 17

4
 EVALUATION OF PUNJAB LAND REFORMS

HISTORY OF PUNJAB LAND REFORMS

The history of land reforms legislations in Punjab dates back to the passing of The Punjab
Security of Land Tenure Act,1953 in the erstwhile area of Punjab w.e.f. April 15,
1953(hereinafter referred to as Punjab Law) and in the erstwhile area of Pepsu, the Pepsu
Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955 w.e.f. March 4, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as
Pepsu Law).

After the dawn of independence and the enforcement of the constitution, the subject “agrarian
reforms” was put at a high priority in line with the thought then prevalent.1 In the year 1946,
All India Kisan Sabha demanded a maximum limit of land-ownership of 25 acres per
landholder. At the time of 1949, Congress Agrarian Reforms Committee, chaired by J.C.
Kumarappa suggested a ceiling on landholding which was to be three times the size of an
economic holding i.e. which would give a reasonable standard of living to the cultivator and
provide full employment to a family of normal size and at least to a pair of bullocks. With the
1st Five Year plan, it was resolved that there should be an upper limit to the amount of land
that an individual may hold while exact upper limit was to be fixed by each state having regard
to its own agrarian history and present problems. Hence, in order to implement the resolution
the abovementioned two acts were passed.

On the Punjab law coming into operation on April 15, 1973, ceiling was imposed on the owning
and holding of land beyond the permissible area of 30 standard acres The land-owner was
required to reserve his area within a period of 6 months from April 15, 1953 and for the purpose
had to intimate his selection, in the prescribed form and manner, to the patwari of the estate
concerned or to such other authority as may be prescribed2. Later the legislature finding that a
large number of land owners had failed to earmark their permissible areas, granted them
another opportunity to select their permissible area by June 20, 1958 by making a declaration
supported by an affidavit in respect of the land owned and held by each and to such authority
as may be prescribed. On his failure to make a selection the prescribed authority could make a
selection for the land owner subject to Course of giving a prior opportunity of being heard.
Failure to furnish declaration also attracted penalty as given in Section 5(c) of the Punjab Law.

1
Neety Kaul, Land Laws in Punjab & Haryana, Chawla publications (P) Ltd, 5th Edn, p 194.
2
Ibid.

5
The collector being the authority prescribed, was entitled to pass an order declaring permissible
area and the surplus area of the land owner. That declaration per se did not divest the landowner
of the ownership of the land but became available in the state government for being utilised for
resettlement of certain classes of tenants.

Likewise, in the Pepsu Law the permissible limit for the purposes of the act was 30 standard
acres of the land but surface-wise could not exceed 80 ordinary acres, under section 5 thereof.
The landowner was given the opportunity within a time limit to reserve land to the extent of 30
standard acres by intimating the selection in the prescribed form and manner to the Collector.3
Later in 1959, on introduction of Section 32(b), another opportunity was given to the land
owner to furnish the collector a return, giving the particulars of all of his land in the prescribed
form and manner and staying there in, his selection of parcel or parcels of land not exceeding
in aggregate the permissible limit, which he desired to retain and other lands in respect of which
he claimed exemption. On failure to do so the collector could seek information otherwise under
section 32(c).

THE PUNJAB LAND REFORMS ACT, 1972

The Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972 received the assent of the president on the 24th march,
1973 and was first published for general information in the Punjab government gazette dated
2nd April, 1973. It has been amended by Punjab Act 40 of 1973 Amended by Punjab Act 22 of
1976 and Punjab Act 32 of 2011.It is an Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to ceiling
on land holding, acquisition of proprietary rights by tenants and other ancilliary matters in the
state of Punjab vesting proprietary rights in occupancy. It extend to whole of Punjab.4

NATURE AND OBJECT.

The Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act applies only to those parts of the State which were
comprised in the State of Punjab before 1 November 1956, the Pepsu Tenancy Act applies to
those territories of erstwhile state of Pepsu which now form part of the State of Punjab. Despite
the merger of the two states in 1956, as a result of the reorganisation the respective laws kept
operating in their respective areas. One of the foremost reasons to introduce the reform law
was to unify the two acts and replace them by only one act on agricultural lands for the whole
State of Punjab. It had become essential that the law relating to ceiling on agricultural land

3
Ibid.
4
Section 1, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.

6
contained in the aforesaid to act and which applies to certain parts of the state of Punjab be
unified and there be only one Act on agriculture and for the whole State of Punjab. Secondly,
the Central Committee on land reform appointed by the Government of India evolved a policy
which sought to make available additional land to be distributed among landless persons to
guarantee to guarantee equitable distribution of land. To achieve the subject it had been decided
that permissible area be reduced, that the surplus area should vest in the State Government and
a family is to be treated as a unit for determining the permissible area. Thirdly, the surplus land
is to be acquired by the State Government for allotment to the landless persons and further
proprietary rights are to be conferred on them.

INCONSISTENCIES WITH OTHER ACTS

Vide this act the Punjab Security of land tenures act, 1953 and the Pepsu Tenancy and
agricultural land act, 1955 have been repealed in so far as these are inconsistent with this Act
The provisions regarding the permissible area, surplus area, vesting of the surplus area in the
state govt. and taking possession thereof, disposal of surplus area, exemption of certain
categories of lands from the operation of the act as contained in the Punjab Security of Land
Tenure Act, 1953 and the Pepsu act 1955 have been amended and replaced by new provisions
which are applicable to the whole of state of Punjab. The provisions relating to security of
tenure to the tenants, fixation of maximum rent payable by them and disposal of disputes
arising between landlords and tenants as contained in these two acts have been left untouched.5

CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY AND RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT OF THE ACT

The Act has no retrospective effect except that the land is to be evaluated as on the appointed
day i.e 24.1.19716. It is well settled principle of law that no provision of the Act should be
given retrospective effect unless the language of the act expressly or by necessary implication
provides so.7 Section 3 of the Act provides that this Act shall come into force at once.8So there
is no provision giving retrospective effect to the act.9There is a limited provision in section 4(7)
that the land is to be evaluated as on the appointed day i.e 24th January 1971.

5
P.S. Khurana, A Treatise on Land Laws(P&H), Shree Ram Law House, 4th Edn (2014), p 6.
6
Jaswant Singh v. Punjab Government, 1993 PLJ 684 (P&H).
7
Neety Kaul, Land Laws in Punjab & Haryana, Chawla publications (P) Ltd, 5th Edn, p 198.
8
Section 3, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
9
Neety Kaul, Land Laws in Punjab & Haryana, Chawla publications (P) Ltd, 5th Edn, p 196.

7
In the State of Punjab v Sucha Singh 10The supreme court held that the Punjab Act is included
in the 9th schedule on Entry 78 by Constitution’s 34th Amendment 1974 and is entitled to
immunity conferred by article 31-B. This Act is constitutionally valid and does not suffer from
any of the constitutional infirmities. the Court held that Punjab land reforms act placed in 9th
scheduled and it cannot be challenged on the ground that it is inconsistent with or takes away
or abridges any of the rights conferred by the provisions of Part III of the Constitution.11

In Sucha Singh v. State of Punjab 12Full bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the
Punjab Land Reforms Act, clearly envisages agricultural reforms in respect of the surplus area
which is to vest in the State Government and has to be transferred to the tenants, members of
the Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes and landless agricultural workers, evidently, for
providing them with the means of livelihood and better utilization of the land so as to increase
the production of food grains, fodder or other crops required by the community for the common
good.
DEFINITIONS UNDER THIS ACT

This Act is for giving effect to the policy of the State towards securing the principles specified
in clauses (b) and (c) of Articles 39 of the Constitution of India.13

“Land” under this act means land which is not occupied as the site of any building in a town or
village and is occupied or has been let for agricultural purposes or for purposes subservient to
agriculture, or for pasture, and includes the sites of buildings, and other structures on such land;
and banjar land14 Where any property is entered as land in revenue records it does not come
within the meaning of the word “land” as defined under the act. Where the land is neither
occupied nor has been let for agricultural purposes of for the purpose subservient to the
agriculture or for pasture but is occupied as a site of building is not land within the meaning of
the Act.15

“Surplus area” means the area in excess of the permissible area16

10
1977 PLJ 139 SC.
11
Hakumat Rai v. State of Punjab, 1980 PLJ 556.
12
AIR 1974 Pb 164 FB.
13
Section 2, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
14
Section 3(5), Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
15
Neety Kaul, Land Laws in Punjab & Haryana, Chawla publications (P) Ltd, 5th Edn, p 197.
16
Section 3(15), Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.

8
“Family” in relation to a person means the person, the wife or husband, as the case may be, of
such person and his or her minor children other than a married minor daughter

“landowner” shall have the meaning assigned to it in Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 and
“tenant” has the meaning assigned to it in the Punjab Tenacy Act, 1887 While interpreting
Section 2(8) of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 read with Section 4(1) of the
Punjab Tenancy Act the Supreme Court17 held that Banjar Qadim and Banjar Jadid lands
cannot be taken into account while computing suprplus area. “tenant” has the meaning assigned
to it in the Punjab Tenacy Act, 1887 and does not include a present holder as defined in the
East Punjab Displaced Persons (Land Resettlement) Act, 194918Unless rent column discloses
liability to pay rent the entry in column of cultivation alone cannot confer the status of tenant.
Where there is no proof of rent being paid or received the petitioner cannot be said to be
tenant.19

The expression “appointed day” is defined in section 3(1) as 24th January 1971. Section 4(5)
of the Act also provides that any sale or gift other than a bonafide sale or transfer after the
appointed day out before the commencement of the act shall be taken into account as if such
land has not been transferred.20Number of family members have to been on date of
commencement of the Act 24.3.1973, not on appointed day i.e 24.1.1971.21Son born before
April 1973 i.e. commencement of the Act but after 24th January, 1971 the appointed day should
be taken into account for working out entitlement of additional area under section 4(2)(d)(ii)
read with section 4(7)-Child born between 24th January 1971 and 2nd April 1973 is entitled to
additional area.22Child born after appointed day 1971 is not entitled to benefit of additional
land .23

CEILING ON LAND24

No person is allowed to own or hold as landowner or mortgagee with the possession or tenant
or partly in one capacity and partly in another in excess of the permissible area.25

17
Munshi Ram v. The Financial Commitioner, Haryana ,1979 PLJ 182 .
18
Section 3(16), Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
19
Tikka Ram v Surjit Sood, 1993 (1) RRR 7.
20
Jaswant Singh v. Punjab Government , 1993(3) RRR 501(P&H).
21
Ibid.
22
Malkiat Singh v. State of Punjab., 1977 PIJ 126 (FCP).
23
Gurdial v. State of Punjab 1983 (I) LLR 290.
24
Chapter II, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
25
Section 4(1) Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.

9
In respect of land under assured irrigation and capable of yielding at least two crops in a year
Permissible limit is seven hectares. Permissible limit in case of land under assured irrigation
for only one crop in a year is eleven hectares. For barani land the limit is 20.5 hectares .

DETERMINATION OF PERMISSIBLE LIMIT IN CERTAIN CASES-

In case of land of other classes including banjar land, permissible limit shall be an area to be
determined according to the prescribed scale with reference to the intensity of irrigation,
productivity and soil classification of such classes having regard to the respective valuation
and the permissible area of the classes of land mentioned at (a), (b) and (c), above .This is
subject to the condition that the area so determined shall not exceed 21.8 hectares. Banjar land
means land which has remained uncultivated for a continuous period of not less than four years
immediately preceding the date on which the question whether such land is Banjar or not
arises.26 Barani land is a land which is not commanded by irrigation source of any kind except
rain. In determining the permissible area any land which was transferred by sale, gift or
otherwise, other than a bona fide sale or transfer, after the appointed day but before the
commencement of this Act, shall be taken into account as if such land had not been transferred
and the onus of proving the transfer as bona fide shall be on the transferor.27For the purpose of
valuation of land one and quarter hectares of Banjar land shall be treated as equivalent in value
to one hectare of barani land. For evaluating the land of any person at any time under this Act,
the land owned by him immediately before the commencement of this Act as well as the land
acquired by him after such commencement by inheritance, bequest or gift from a person to
whom he is an heir shall be evaluated as if the evaluation was being made on the appointed day
and the land acquired by him after such commencement in any other manner shall be evaluated
as if the evaluation was being made on the date of such acquisition.28

In Jaswant Singh v. Punjab Government29, the Court held that for determination of permissible
area under the Punjab Land Reforms Act, the Act takes note of only family of the landowner
as defined in section 3(4) of the Act. The court further held that family in relation to a person
means the wife or husband of such person and his or her minor children other than married
minor daughter. Divorced daughter is not included in this definition.30 In State of Punjab v.

26
In Bharat Singh v. Union of India, 1982 LLR 644 (P&H).
27
Section 4 proviso, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
28
Ibid.
29
1993(3) RRR 501.
30
Ajmer Singh v. State of Punjab, 1979 PLJ 316(P&H).

10
Sanjiv Kumar,31the Supreme Court held that the concept of family unit and clubbing together
in reference lands by each member of the family in it and applying the limitation of ceiling to
the aggregation of such lands is not violative of second proviso to clause (1) of Article 31-A
and is protected under Article 31-B of the Constitution. The son from the loins of a previous
husband is not entitled to any right to claim a separate unit out of land of present adoptive
father32. In Jagir Singh v. State of Punjab33, land was gifted to daughter-in-law of pre-deceased
son after appointed day but before commencement of the Act. The Court held that it is a bona
fide transaction and State is not entitled to take this area into consideration for the purpose of
declaring surplus. The Court held that the child born after the appointed day i.e. 24.01.1971 is
not entitled to benefit of additional land34. In Mangat Ram v. Financial Commissioner.,
Revenue, Haryana35, the Court held that where the number of members of family exceeds five,
the permissible area shall be increased by 1/5' of permissible area of each member in excess of
five. a son born before commencement of the Act but after the appointed day is entitled to the
additional area.36 Grand children are not included in the definition of family and not entitled to
a separate unit. 37 The land comprised in an orchard on the appointed day i.e., 24.1.1971 shall
be considered as Barani land for the purpose of determining the permissible area. While
computing the permissible area of a person, the share held by him in a Registered Cooperative
Farming Society shall also be considered and taken into account.

Every person, who on the appointed day or at any time thereafter, owns or holds land in excess
of the permissible area, shall select his permissible area and intimate his selection to the
Collector, through a declaration to be furnished in such form and manner and within such
period as may be prescribed38 .if such person has an adult son, he shall also be entitled to select
separate permissible area in respect of each such son subject to the condition that the land so
selected together with the land already owned or held by such son, shall not exceed the
permissible area of each such son .39Provided that where land is situate in more than one
patwari circle, the declaration shall be supported by an affidavit in the prescribed form. 40

31
1977 PLJ 139.
32
Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, 1984(1) LLR 251 (FCP).
33
1981 RLR 22 (P&H).
34
Gurdial Singh v. State of Punjab, 1983 RLJ 485 (FCP).
35
1994(2) RRR 612 (P&H).
36
Malkiat Singh v. State of Punjab, 1977 PLJ (FCP).
37
Udham Kaur and others v. State of Punjab, 1991(1) RRR 162 (FCP).
38
Section 5(1), Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
39
Ibid.
40
Section 5(1) proviso, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.

11
In making the selection, such a person shall include, firstly land mortgaged without possession
and, secondly, land under self-cultivation on the date of commencement of the period
prescribed for furnishing the declaration under sub-section (1), but shall not include area
declared surplus under the Punjab law, the Pepsu law or this Act, other than the area which was
exempt from utilization by the State Government immediately before such commencement. If
any person fails to furnish the declaration in accordance with the provisions of section 5, the
Collector shall obtain the requisite information in the prescribed manner.41

DETERMINATION OF SURPLUS AREAS BY THE COLLECTOR AND HIS POWERS UNDER THE ACT-

On the basis of the information given and after making such inquiry as he may deem fit, the
Collector shall, by an order determine the permissible area and the surplus area of a landowner
or a tenant, as the case may be. If any person referred to in sub-section (1) of section 5 fails to
furnish the declaration or files a declaration containing information which is false or which he
knows or has reason to believe to be false or which he does not believe to be true, he shall be
punishable with imprisonment which may extend to two years, or with fine which may extend
to two thousand rupees or with both.42For the purpose of determining the surplus area of any
person any judgment, decree or order of a Court or other authority obtained on or after the
appointed day and having the effect of diminishing the surplus area of such a person and a
tenancy created on or after the appointed da] in any land which has been or could have been
declared as surplus area of such a person under the Punjab law, the Pepsu law or this Act shall
be ignored.

In Sucha Singh v. State of Punjab43 is was held that every person described in section 5, whether
male or female, is allowed the some permissible area and there is no discrimination qua one
landowner and the other on the ground of sex alone, that is, the female owners or holders of
land have not been treated differently from the male owners or holders of land. The land-owner
shall not be entitled to retain land to the extent of the permissible area in respect of his adult
son out of the surplus area already determined under the Punjab Law or the Pepsu Law.44Once
surplus area determined, liabilities to surrender and deliver possession of surplus area does not
in any way cease with the death of land-owner.45 In Kulbir Singh v. Commissioner (Appeals),

41
Section 6, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
42
Section 7, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
43
1974 PLJ 168.
44
Inder Singh v. State of Punjab, 1978 RCR 566 (P&H).
45
Kaka Singh v. State of Punjab, 1982 PU 484.

12
Jalandhar,46 Land-owner died before the declaration of surplus area, the Financial
Commissioner held that declaration of surplus area by Collector in the hands of a person who
had already expired cannot stand. The land is to be assessed in the hands of legal heirs. Tenancy
created on or after appointed day is to be ignored while determining surplus area. 47

The Collector may after an area has become surplus under the Punjab law or the Pepsu law or
becomes surplus under this Act, direct the landowner or tenant or any other person in
possession of such area to deliver possession thereof, within ten days of the service of the order
on him, to such person as may be specified in the order. If the person refuses or fails without
reasonable cause to comply, the Collector may take possession of that area by use such force
as may be necessary.48

Where a person owns land jointly with other persons and his share of such land or part thereof
has been or is to be declared as surplus area, the Collector, on his own motion, may, after
summary enquiry and after affording to such a person an opportunity of being heard, separate
his share of such land or part thereof in the land owned by him jointly with other persons.49

Where, after the declaration of the surplus area of any person and before the utilization thereof,
his land has been subjected to the process of consolidation, the Collector shall also be
competent to separate the surplus area of such a person out of the area of land obtained by him
after consolidation .50

VESTING OF UNUTILIZED SURPLUS AREA IN THE STATE GOVERNMENT.51

Notwithstanding anything contained in any law, custom or usage for the time being in force,
but subject to the provisions of Section 15, the surplus area declared as such under the Punjab
law or the Pepsu law, which has not been utilized till the commencement of this Act and the
surplus area declared as such under this Act, shall, on the date on which possession thereof is
taken by or on behalf of the State Government, vest in the State Government, free from all
encumbrances and in the case of surplus area of a tenant which is included within the
permissible area of the landowner the right and interest of the tenant in such areas shall stand
terminated on the aforesaid date. Where any land falling within the surplus area is mortgaged

46
1985 PU 399 (FCP).
47
Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab, 1986 PU 183 (FCP).
48
Section 9, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
49
Section 13, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
50
Section 13, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
51
Section 8, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.

13
with possession, only the mortgagee rights shall vest in the State Government. Section 8 cannot
be interpreted in seclusion. This provision is subject to section 4 and 5 read with section 7 of
the act. The legislature clearly intended that when landowners own lands in excess of the
permissible limit, such cases shall first be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions
of Punjab and Pespu law, and if to any of these cases section 4 and 5 of the reform act applies,
they shall be reprocessed.52The Supreme Court held that the surplus land does not vest in the
State Government immediately on passing of an order or declaration as surplus. It vests in the
state only on taking possession by the State Government.53The vesting land under section 8 is
free from all encumbrances 54

AMOUNT PAYABLE FOR THE SURPLUS AREA55.

The Collector or the officer authorised by the State Government in this behalf shall determine
the amount to be paid for the land which has vested in the State Government under section 8
subject to the principles that for the first three hectares of land, twelve times the fair rent,
subject to a maximum of five thousand rupees per hectare; for the next three hectares of land,
nine times the fair rent subject to a maximum of three thousand seven hundred and fifty rupees
per hectare; and for the remaining land, six times the fair rent, subject to a maximum of two
thousand and five hundred rupees per hectare shall be paid Where in the surplus area of any
person mortgagee rights have vested in the State Government, the amount payable to the
mortgagee shall be the mortgage money due to the mortgagee, or the amount payable under
this section, whichever is less. The amount shall be applied firstly to discharge Government
dues, secondly to meet the claims of secured creditors and then to pay dues of other claimants.
The surplus area, which has vested in the State Government under section 8, shall be at the
disposal of the State Government.The State Government may, by notification in the official
Gazette, name a scheme for utilizing the surplus area under the Punjab law, the Pepsu law or
this Act by, -

(a) allotment to tenants, members of Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes and landless
agricultural workers, of an area not exceeding two hectares of the first quality land or equivalent
area, provided that the total area held or owned by any such allottee, after the allotment, shall
not exceed two hectares of the first quality land or equivalent area.

52
Ranjit Ram v. Financial Commissioner, Revenue, Punjab and others , 1981 PLJ 259.
53
Harnek Singh v. Financial Commissioner, Appeals, Punjab, 2002(1) RCR(Civil) 127 (SC).
54
Karnail Singh v. State of Punjab and Others, 1989 P13 95.
55
Section 10, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.

14
(b) Any scheme framed by the State Government under sub-section (2) may provide for the
terms and conditions on which the rights of ownership are to be conferred on the tenants and
also the terms and conditions on which the land comprised in the surplus area is to be
allotted.56If an area is not vested in State Government the question of formulating utilization
scheme under section 11(2) does not arise. 57

BAR ON FUTURE ACQUISITION OF LAND IN EXCESS OF PERMISSIBLE AREA58

No person, whether as landowner or tenant, shall acquire or possess any land, which with or
without the land already owned, or held by him, in the aggregate, exceeds the permissible area
Any transfer, exchange, lease, agreement or settlement made in contravention of this provisions
shall be null and void. Nothing in this section shall apply to land held by a co-operative society
if the land owned or held by an individual member of the society, together with his share in the
land held by such a society does not exceeds the permissible area.

EXEMPTION OF LANDS BELONGING TO RELIGIOUS OR CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS

Notwithstanding any judgment, decree or order, the provisions of this Chapter shall not apply
to lands belonging to any religious or charitable institution of a public nature (Temple,
Gurudwara, gaushala, Wakf etc.) in existence immediately before the date of commencement
of this Act, but not belonging to the mahant, mohtamim or manager thereof Provided that such
land or income therefrom is utilized for the specified purpose

In Akhara Braham Buta v. Shri Inderjit (since dead) Rep. By his L.Rs59 The main plea taken
on behalf of the petitioner is that Akhara Braham Buta is religious and charitable Institution of
a public nature and this is stands exempted under Section 14 of the Punjab Land Reforms Act
and the tenants-respondents have no right to make applications for purchase under Section 18
of the Punjab Security and Land Tenures Act, 1953 read with Section 15 of the Punjab Land
Reforms Act. The respondents do not fulfill the requisition conditions as laid down in Section
18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act; that Section 15 of the Land Reforms Act cannot
overdrive the provisions of Section 14 of the Act; that the respondent is not in possession of
the land in dispute from the year 1953. Had they been in possession, the tenants permissible
area would have been declared.

56
Section 11, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
57
Jagraj Singh v. State of Punjab, 1978 PLJ 59 (DB).
58
Section 12, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.
59
1991 PLJ 503.

15
The provision in regard to appeal, review and revision under this Act shall, are same as
provided in sections 80, 81, 82, 83 and 84 of the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1987 (Act XVI of
1887).the validity of any proceeding or order taken or made under this Act shall not be called
in question in any court or before any other authority.No civil court shall have jurisdiction to
entertain or proceed any suit, instituted after the appointed day, for specific performance of a
contract for transfer of land

EXEMPTION OF CERTAIN LANDS FROM THE OPERATION OF THE ACT 60

lands owned by or vested in the State Government otherwise than under the provisions of this
Act, or lands taken on lease by the State Government;lands belonging to or vested in a local
authority or the Punjab Agricultural University or any corporation owned or controlled by the
State Government; lands owned by or vested in or taken on lease by the Central Government;
lands owned by the Bhoodan Yagna Board under the Punjab Bhoodan Yagna Act, 1955; lands
owned or held by an agricultural co-operative credit society, land Mortgaged Bank, the State
or Central Co-operative bank or any other Bankare exempted.

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

The Punjab Land Reforms is a state Act but since it is given in the 9th schedule of the
Constitution, it should be sent to the union government for amendment that not only both
husband and wife to own agricultural land separately but also their adult children to be covered
by the same rule. Each adult member of a family should be considered a separate unit for
owning agricultural land. Also data is to be assessed that how much acres of fertile land a
member of family should hold under the act, which will bring a lot of 'benami' agricultural land
in the name of real owners. The problem is severe particularly in the Malwa region, where the
landholdings are very high compared with the Majha and Doaba regions of Punjab. Punjab
though has one of the most liberal land-ceiling laws i.e. The Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972,
is still needs to rectify the abovementioned loopholes.

60
Section 27, Punjab land Reforms Act, 1972.

16
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

• BOOKS

1. P.S. KHURANA, A TREATISE ON LAND LAWS, (4th Ed 2014, Shree Ram Law House)
2. NEETY KAUL, LAND LAWS IN PUNJAB & HARYANA, (Chawla publications (P) Ltd.).
3. JAIN J.L., THE PUNJAB LAND REVENUE ACT, (Jain Law Agency).
4. HARSHALI CHOUDHARY, PUNJAB AND HARYANA LAND LAWS, (1st Ed 2016,
Central Law Publications).

• BARE ACTS

1. The Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972

• WEBSITES

1. www.scconline.com
2. www.manupatra.com
3. http://punjabrevenue.nic.in/Lrefact72i.htm

17