HC raps Haryana for ‘half-a-century’ delay in deciding land allotment case; says tenant died waiting for decision

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has castigated the State of Haryana for its failure to take a decision for more than 50 years in a matter involving 100 kanals originally belonging to the Provincial Government but allotted to a tenant who cultivated the land until its transfer to him on 1973 for Rs 500.

The land was allotted to Nanak under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act of 1953. He became owner in possession, but the revenue record was never corrected from tenancy to ownership. The State and other defendants, relying on erroneous revenue entries in their favour, sought to auction the land, compelling the filing of a suit seeking declaration of ownership and protection against illegal alienation.”

Dismissing the State’s appeal filed 28 years ago against Yamuna Nagar court orders, Justice Virinder Aggarwal asserted “no decision was rendered by the State of Haryana for over half a century,” while holding the delay as emblematic of systemic failure.

“The official concerned delayed action for over half a century, failing to confirm the sale, and Nanak himself passed away while awaiting the decision, demonstrating a lamentable failure of the administrative machinery,” Justice Aggarwal observed, while accentuating the human cost of bureaucratic inertia.

Referring to the 1953 Act, the Bench observed surplus land from large landholders was to be acquired and allotted to eligible tenants. “Nanak was found to be one such eligible tenant, and the suit land was accordingly allotted to him in accordance with the objectives of the Act. Nanak deposited the sale consideration in 1973, after which the competent authority was required to confirm the sale in his favour.”

Holding that the bureaucracy failed to fulfill the legislative intent, Justice Aggarwal observed: “It is incumbent upon the bureaucracy to act expeditiously to ensure that the legislative intent of the Act is realised.… Given that the sale has not been formally rejected by the competent authority for such an inordinate period, it must be deemed to have been confirmed.”

Rejecting the State’s argument that the case stood governed by the Haryana Ceiling of Land Holdings Act, 1972, Justice Aggarwal asserted that this plea was never raised before any lower court and was without merit. The court added that the 1972 Act expressly safeguarded all applications pending immediately before its commencement, directing that such matters would be decided as if the Act had not been enacted. “Furthermore, the decision was required to be taken by the officers of the State of Haryana; yet, no decision was rendered for over ‘half a century’,” Justice Aggarwal added.

Concluding that Nanak had acquired absolute ownership of the land, the court held: “The appellant-State is without any legal or equitable authority to forcibly dispossess the respondents-plaintiffs, and any claim of possession would lie exclusively with the natural heirs of Nanak, who may initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.”

The court also placed the issue in a larger constitutional context, observing that India’s legislative vision could only be realised through prompt and efficient implementation by the executive. “Any deficiency, delay, or inefficiency in administrative implementation not only deprives the public of their constitutionally and legislatively guaranteed rights but also subverts the objectives of the Constitution, engendering widespread public disaffection and eroding faith in governance and the rule of law. Bureaucratic inefficiency, therefore, is not a mere procedural lapse; it constitutes a serious impediment to national development,” the court stated.

The Bench traced the origins of the agrarian reform statutes to the early years after Independence, when legislatures sought to safeguard tenants from eviction and to restructure landholding patterns. It asserted that such laws were “indispensable to the post-independence reconstruction of the nation” and were meant to make “the constitutional mandate of socioeconomic justice substantively enforceable.”

Case timeline:

1953: Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act enacted

February 26, 1973: Land transferred to Nanak for Rs 500

September 21, 1984: Nanak bequeaths land by registered Will

1997: The State and other appellants file regular second appeal

October 2025: High Court dismisses State’s appeal