EVALUATION OF PUNJAB LAND REFORMS ACT, 1972

Submitted to: Mrs. Kirandeep Kaur, Asst Prof. of Land Laws

In partial fulfillment of requirement of BALLB Programme at Army Institute of Law

OCTOBER 6, 2017
SUBMITTED BY: NISHA, 1404
4th yr, Sec B
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 whenever required. I have
learnt a lot through my project.

-Nisha
-1404
-4th year (Sec B)

1
TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction
2. Background
3. Nature & Object
4. Inconsistency with other acts
5. Constitutional Validity
6. Interpretation of the act
7. Provisions

Chapter 1 - Definitions

Chapter 2 - Ceiling on Land

Chapter 3 – Miscellaneous

2
TABLE OF CASES

1. State of Punjab vs Sucha Singh

2. Hakumat Rai vs State of Punjab
3. Sucha Singh vs State of Punjab
4. Shakti Devi vs Financial Commissioner, Punjab
5. Jaswant Singh vs Punjab Government
6. Dungar Mal v State
7. Bal Raj Ahuja vs State of Punjab
8. Jasmer Singh vs State of Punjab
9. Sucha Singh v State of Punjab
10. Tikka Ram v Surjit Sood
11. Sawaran Singh vs. State of Punjab and others
12. Behari Lal vs State
13. Mukhtiar Singh vs State of Punjab
14. Karnail Singh vs. State of Punjab and others
15. Roop Singh v State of Punjab
16. Akhara Braham Buta vs. Shri Inderjit (since dead) Rep. By his L.Rs

3
INTRODUCTION:

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. 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.

Later,

- Amended by Punjab Act 40 of 1973

- Amended by Punjab Act 22 of 1976
- Amended by Punjab Act 32 of 2011

BACKGROUND OF PUNJAB LAND REFORMS ACT 19721

In the year 1946, All India Kisan Sabha demanded a maximum limit of land-ownership of 25 acres
per landholder. Economic program committee headed by Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru recommended, ‘the
maximum size of holdings should be fixed. The surplus land over such a maximum should be
acquired and placed at disposal of the village’. 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. In the year 1953, at All India Congress
Committee Agra Session, it decided that state governments should take immediate steps for the
fixation of ceiling on landholdings, with a view to redistribute the land. Hence, in order to
implement the resolution two acts were passed with respect to the ceiling of the land, namely:

1
P.S. Khurana, A Treatise on Land Laws(P&H), Shree Ram Law House, 4th Edn (2014)

4
 1. In the erstwhile area of Punjab- The Punjab Security of Land Tenure Act,1953 coming
into force w.e.f. April 15, 1953;
- Further, amended in the year 1955, 1957, 1962, 1969 and then led to Punjab Land Reforms
Act 1972
- Applies to only those parts of the State which were comprised in the state of Punjab before
1st November, 1956.

2. In the erstwhile area of PEPSU- The Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955
coming into force w.e.f. March 4 1955.
- Applies to those territories of erstwhile state of Pepsu which now form part of the state of
Punjab.
So, it became essential that the law relating to ceiling on agricultural land contained in the
aforesaid two acts and which applies to certain parts of the State of Punjab should be unified
and there should be only one act on the agricultural and for the whole of the state of punjab.

NATURE & OBJECT OF PUNJAB LAND REFORMS ACT, 1972:2

As is clear from the very title of the Act, the object is to consolidate and amend the law relating to
ceiling on land holdings, acquisition of proprietary rights by tenants and other and other ancilliary
matters in the state of Punjab. The objects and Reasons of the act are as follows:

i. Need for unification of laws on agricultural land as there were two acts pertaining to
ceiling on agricultural land.
ii. 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 equitable distribution of land.
To achieve this object it was 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.

2
Neety Kaul, Land Laws in Punjab & Haryana, Chawla publications (P) Ltd, 5th Edn, pg 196.

5
 iii. 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.

After giving careful considerations to the various aspects of land reforms measures, which are
necessary in the interest of Social Justice as also Agricultural Production, it has been decided that
the ceiling limits be suitable reduced, that the entire surplus area should vest in the State
Government and that the criteria of eligibility for allotment of such areas should be made broad
based.

INCONSISTENCY WITH OTHER ACTS:3

Vide this Act, the Punjab Security of Land Tenure Act, 1953 and the Pepsu Tenancy and
agricultural land act, 1955 have been repealed so far as they are inconsistent with the provisions
of 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 1955bhave 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.

3
P.S. Khurana, A Treatise on Land Laws(P&H), Shree Ram Law House, 4th Edn (2014)

6
CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY:

 CASE: State of Punjab vs Sucha Singh 4

HELD: That the Punjab Land Reforms Act is included in the Ninth Schedule on Entry 78
by Constitution (34th amendment) Act, 1974 and is entitled to immunity conferred by
article 31-B. This Act is Constitutionally valid.
 CASE: Hakumat Rai vs State of Punjab 5
HELD: That the Punjab Land Reforms Act placed in 9th schedule and it cannot be
challenged on the ground that it is inconsistent with or takes away or abridges any of the
rights conferred by provisions of Part III of Constitution.
 CASE: Sucha Singh vs State of Punjab 6
HELD: Full 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 Govt 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 foodgrains, fodder or other crops required by the community for the common
good.
 CASE: Shakti Devi vs Financial Commissioner, Punjab7
HELD: That the Punjab Land Reforms Act and held that it does not suffer from any of the
Constitutional infirmities.
 RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT
CASE: Jaswant Singh vs Punjab Government8
HELD: That the Act has no retrospective effect except that the land is to be evaluated as
on the appointed day i.e. 24.01.1971.

4
1977 PLJ 139 SC
5
1980 PLJ 556
6
AIR 1974 Pb 164 FB
7
1997(3) ICC 188
8
1993 PLJ 684 (P & H)

7
INTERPRETAION OF LAND REFORMS ACT: 9

In view of the clear language of the statute, the petitioner cannot import the notions of
inconvenience or hardship. The inconvenience and hardship are inherent in the process of land
reforms. The persons possessing large holdings are made to surrender lands belonging to them.
They naturally must be feeling the pinch.

However, there is no escape from the same. The Land Reforms have been devised to ameliorate
the conditions of the teaming masses. The language used in the Reforms Act is very clear. There
is no ambiguity. The court has to apply the mandate of the Legislature as expressed in the language
of the Statute.10

CH I -DEFINITIONS UNDER THE ACT- U/S 3

Definitions - In this Act’ unless the context otherwise requires11—

 3(1) “Appointed Day” means the twenty-fourth day of January, 197112

Case: Dungar Mal v State13
Held: where the tenancy came into force after appointed day, it was held that only a person
who was a tenant on the appointed day is entitled to notice.
 3(5) “land” 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 sub-servient
to agriculture, or for pasture, and includes14:-
a) the sites of buildings, and other structures on such land; and
b) banjar land;
 3(6) “landowner” shall have the meaning assigned to it in Punjab Land Revenue Act,
1887, (Punjab Act XVII of 1887);
Case: Jasmer Singh vs State of Punjab15

9
Neety Kaul, Land Laws in Punjab & Haryana, Chawla publications (P) Ltd, 5th Edn, pg 196.
10
Hakumat Raj and others v State of Punjab & others, 1980 PLJ 556 (P&H)
11
The Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972, http://punjabrevenue.nic.in/Lrefact72i.htm, last visited on 04.10.17.
12
Jaswant Singh v Punjab Government 1993(3) RRR 501 (P&H)
13
1985(2) LLR 219 : 1985 PLJ 258 (FCP)
14
Bal Raj Ahuja vs State of Punjab, 1988 PLJ 423 (P&H)
15
1988 PLJ 423 (P&H)

8
 Held: upheld the definition under Revenue Act and held that person in enjoyment of profits
of land owned by another person is landowner.
 3(10) “person” includes a company, family association or other body of individuals,
whether incorporated or not, and any institution capable of holding property16.
 3(16) “tenant” has the meaning assigned to it in the Punjab Tenacy Act, 1887 (Act XVI
of 1887) and includes a sub-tenant and self-cultivating lessee, but shall not include a
present holder as defined in clause (f) of section 2 of the East Punjab Displaced Persons
(Land Resettlement) Act, 1949.17

CH-II- CEILING ON LAND

Sec 4 - Permissible area – (1) Subject to the provisions of section 5, no person shall 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].

(2) `Permissible area’ shall mean in respect of –

a) land under assured irrigation and capable of yielding at least two crops in ayear
(hereinafter in this Act referred to as `the first quality land’) seven hectares; or
b) land under assured irrigation for only one crop in a year, eleven hectares; or
c) barani land, 20.5 hectares; or
d) land of other classes including banjar land, and area to be determined accordingly 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 [subject to the condition
that the area so determined shall not exceed 21.8 hectares].

16
Sucha Singh v State of Punjab, AIR 1974 Punjab 162
17
Tikka Ram v Surjit Sood, 1993(1) RRR 7.

9
Evaluation- this sec lays down that where the number of members of a family exceeds five, the
permissible area shall increase by one-fifth for each member in excess of five, subject to the
condition that additional land shall be allowed for not more than three such members.

SEC 5 - Selection of permissible area and furnishing of declaration by certain persons-

provides that every person who owns or holds land as landowner or mortgagee with possession or
tenant or partly in one capacity and partly in another in excess of permissible area, shall select his
permissible area. It further lays down that if such a person has an adult son, he shall be entitled to
select permissible area in respect of each adult son.

So it provides for the measure of permissible area to be selected by each landowner and
for providing a measure the legislature can adopt any method.

Reassessment – In Ranjit Ram’s case a Full bench of this Court has held that if a landowner whose
land had been declared surplus dies before the land had been utilised the land ws to be reassessed
in terms of Section (5)1) of the Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972, in the hands of his adult sons.18

It is clear that the possession of the area declared surplus under the old Act continues to be
with the landowner i.e. the petitioner. It implies that the surplus area had not been utilised. That
being so, the Collector was to re-determine the area under the new Act afresh in terms of the
authorities cited by the petitioner. 19

SEC 7 – Determination of permissible and surplus area- (1) Provides that collector shall

determine the permissible area and the surplus area of a landowner or tenant on the basis of:

a) information given in declaration furnished by the landowner or tenant under sec 5; or

b) information detailed under sec 6 and information collected by the collector after making
inquiry as he deems fit.

(2) provides that in case fails to furnish above mentioned information or it is false, then punishable
with maximum 2 years or max Rs 2000 fine or both.

18
Sawaran Singh vs. State of Punjab and others, 1993 PLJ 329
19
Behari Lal vs, State, 1992 LLT 38(F.C.Punajb)

10
Case: Mukhtiar Singh vs State of Punjab20 A landowner gave false information regarding age of
his son. It was held that he is liable to be prosecuted U/S 7(2)

SEC 8 - Vesting of utilized surplus area in the State Government – the surplus area declared

as such under the Punjab Law or the Pespu 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 area shall stand
terminated on the aforesaid date:

Provided that where any land falling within the surplus area is mortgaged with
possession, only the mortgagee rights shall vest in the State Government.

Under Section 8 of the 1972 Act, the land vests in the State Government free from all
encumbrances only on the date on which possession thereof is taken by or on behalf of the State
Government. In this case when possession was taken, that is, on 28th March, 1983, the landowner
had died and it has to be seen whether the matter of surplus area had to be re-determined in the
hands of his heirs or the taking of possession after the death of landowner is in accordance with
law. 21

SEC 9 - Power to take possession of surplus area – (1) The Collector may, by an order in

writing 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

Case: Roop Singh vs. State of Punjab22

As the petitioner had purchased 32 Kanals out of the entire holding Mool Chand, they received a
notice dated October 28, 1975 under Section 9(1) of the Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972 for

20
19989(2) RCR (Civil) 624 (FCP),
21
Karnail Singh vs. State of Punjab and others, 1989 PLJ 95
22
1991 PLJ 560

11
delivering the possession of the surplus area. Without determining the surplus area afresh in
accordance with the judgement of this Court in CWP No.3211 of 1969, the writ petitioners could
not be asked to deliver possession. They could only be asked to deliver possession in case it is
found that the area since Mool Chand has died, it would have to be seen whether there is any
surplus area in the hands of the heirs of Mool Chand

SEC 10 – Amount payable for the surplus area-

 Determination of amount- duty of collector or other authorized officer to assess and

determine the amount to be paid for such land.
 Principles for determination of such amount-
i. First three hectares- twelve times the fair rent (Max Rs. 5000/- per hectare)
ii. Next three hectares- nine times the fair rent (Max Rs 3750/- per hectare)
iii. The Remaining land- six times the fair rent (Max Rs 2500/- per hectare)
 Such authority shall prepare a statement and apportion the amount amongst persons as per
their interest in the land.

SEC 14 Exemption of lands belonging to religious or charitable institutions –

Notwithstanding any judgement, 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

Case: Akhara Braham Buta vs. Shri Inderjit (since dead) Rep. By his L.Rs23

Held: 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

23
1991 PLJ 503

12
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.

SEC 18 - Appeal, review and revisions -- The provision in regard to appeal, review and revision

under this Act shall, so far as may be, the same as provided in sections 80, 81, 82, 83 and 84 of the
Punjab Tenancy Act, 1987 (Act XVI of 1887).

After he failed to-prefer an appeal/revision against the orders determining the surplus area within
the limitation prescribed under the Act, the petitioners have forefeited the right to challenge the
same which operate as res judicata between the petitioners and the State Government24

SEC 21 - Bar of jurisdiction – (1) 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.

(2) 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

SEC 27 - Exemption of certain lands from the operation of the Act –

i. 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;
ii. lands belonging to or vested in a local authority or the Punjab Agricultural University or
any corporation owned or controlled by the State Government;
iii. lands owned by or vested in or taken on lease by the Central Government;
iv. lands owned by the Bhoodan Yagna Board under the Punjab Bhoodan Yagna Act, 1955;
v. lands owned or held by an agricultural co-operative credit society, land Mortgaged Bank,
the State or Central Co-operative bank or any other Bank;

24
1989 PLJ 46

13
CONCLUSION

Punjab though has one of the most liberal land-ceiling laws i.e. The Punjab Land Reforms Act,
1972, which has been amended several times in which a family unit (husband, wife, and children)
cannot own more than 17.5 acres of fertile agricultural land having access to good irrigation
facilities. However, the law also provides for an owner to hold up to 32 acres, if it is barren and
without irrigation facilities.

The Punjab Land Reforms is a state Act but since it is given in the 9th schedule of the Constitution,
BUT it shall 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.

14
BIBLIOGRAPHY

 BOOKS
1. P.S. Khurana, A Treatise on Land Laws, Shree Ram Law House, 4th edn 2014.
2. Harshali Choudhary, Punjab and Haryana Land Laws, Central Law Publications,
1st edn 2016.
3. Jain J.L., The Punjab Land Revenue Act, Jain Law Agency
4. Neety Kaul, Land Laws in Punjab & Haryana, Chawla publications (P) Ltd.

 Internet
1. The Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972, http://punjabrevenue.nic.in/Lrefact72i.htm
2. www.scconline.com
3. www.manupatra.com

15