259, wherein it has been held that a landowner whose lands have been declared surplus under the 1953 Act and who has been divested of ownership of the surplus area before the enforcement of the Punjab Land Reforms Act, is entitled to select permissible area for his family and for each of his adult sons in view of the provisions of Section 4 read with Section 5(1) of the New Act. 8. Admittedly, the petitioners had not been divested of the ownership or possession of land in dispute. The case of the petitioners is clearly covered by the ratio of Ranjit Ram's case (supra). 9. For the above mentioned reasons, I allow this petition and set aside the order Annexure P.1 and the notice issued to the petitioners under section 9(1) of the New Act, and direct the authorities to decide the case in accordance with the New Act and in the light of the observations made in this judgment. No costs. Petition accepted.