| The appellant was the owner of 56 standard acres of agricultural land in Punjab from which she was ousted in 1954 by certain persons who had no title to the land and was restored to possession in 1960 after a suit filed by her was decreed in her favour. |
| The Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 13 of 1955 was brought into force in March, 1955. |
| Under section 5 of that Act any land owner owning land exceeding 30 standard acres was entitled to select for personal cultivation a maximum area of land within the permissible limit and to inform the collector of his selection. |
| Since the appellant 's land was in the occupation of the trespassers at the time, she did not make any selection under section 5. |
| The Act was amended with effect from October 30, 1956 by the Fast Punjab Act 15 of 1956 which introduced Chapter IV A and the new section 32 A(1) provided that no person shall be entitled to hold land under his personal cultivation which exceeds in the, aggregate the permissible limit. |
| The appellant submitted a return in the prescribed form in respect of her land and the collector, after considering her objections, declared that she held 21 standard acres in excess of the ceiling prescribed by the Act. |
| This order was confirmed in appeal by the Commissioner and a writ petition to quash the order was rejected by the High Court. |
| In appeal to this Court it was contended on behalf of the appellant (i) that section 32 A(1) operates only at the point of time when the Act comes into force i.e. October 30. |
| 1956; the ceiling could be enforced only if a person owned or held land in excess of the permissible limit on that day or if he acquired or possessed it after the commencement of Act 15 of 1956 by transfer, exchange, inheritance or any of the other ways expressly covered by sections 32 L and 32 M; and (ii) the appellant should in any event have been permitted to reserve 10 acres out of her holding under section 32 K for an orchard. |
| HELD: Dismissing the appeal. |
| (i) The ban imposed by section 32 A(1) operates whenever a person is found to own or hold land in personal cultivation exceeding, the permissible limit. |
| [650G] Although sections 32 L and 32 M deal expressly with certain classes of acquisitions after the date of commencement of the Act. |
| on that account no restriction can be imposed upon the connotation of the expression "no person shall be entitled to own or held" occurring in section 32 A. that it is limited in its operation to the point of commencement of the Act. |
| [649B D] 647 Such an interpretation is also contrary to the scheme of the Act. |
| Under the scheme of Chapters II, III and IV as they originally stood the tenants were given the right to purchase the lands not selected by the landowner for personal cultivation, but the landowner was otherwise subject to no further restrictions; by Ch. |
| IV A it was in tended to place a ceiling upon the owning or holding of land for personal cultivation by a landowner or a tenant in excess of the permissible limit and to provide that the excess land be appropriated to the State. |
| [650B, C] (ii) In order to qualify for the exemption for land upto 10 acres under section 32 K for planting an orchard, the landowner has to give an undertaking that he will bring the land within two years from the commencement of the Amending Act under an orchard, has to plant the orchard within that period, and to maintain it as such till the date of the grant of exemption. |
| A person like the appellant who is not in possession of the land at the date when the Amending Act is brought into force may not be in a position to give and fulfill the undertaking. |
| The legislature has not made any provision for extending the time in respect of special cases like the present or for extending the time for planting an orchard; it is for the legislature to rectify this lacuna and not for the Court to give a strained meaning to the words used by the legislature which they do not bear. |
| [651C F] |
|
|
