BHURI WIDOW Vs. GIRDHARI SON OF KRISHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Petition has been filed under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 against the order dated 22.10.2007 passed by Learned Commissioner, Hisar Division by which he dismissed the appeal filed by the Petitioner against order dated 25.07.2003 passed by Collector, Sirsa vide which order dated 03.09.2002 passed by Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Sirsa was set aside and case was remanded back to him for a fresh decision.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Petitioners filed an application on 13.10.1999 for partition of land measuring 81 Kanals 10 Marias situated in village Khireka, District Sirsa before Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Sirsa. Respondents raped objections that they should be given passage to their land and compensation for improvement made by them on the partitioned land. Their objections were dismissed and Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Sirsa passed an order of final portion on 03.09.2002 after hearing the parties. Respondents filed an Appeal before Collector, Sirsa challenging this order on the ground that their objections were not heard by Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Sirsa. This Appeal was accepted and vide order dated 25.07.2003, case was remanded back to Assistant Collector 1st Grade for passing a fresh order. Against this order Petitioners filed Appeal before the Learned Commissioner, Hisar Division, which was dismissed filed Appeal before the Learned Commissioner, Hisar Division, which was dismissed vide order dated 22.10.2007. Hence, this Revision Petition.

(3.) WRITTEN arguments have been submitted in this case. It has been argued on behalf of the Petitioners that Collector, Sirsa has wrongly and illegally set aside the well reasoned judgement dated 03.09.2002 passed by Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Sirsa. Collector, Sirsa has not passed a speaking order on merits and has only mentioned that objections of the Respondents have not been considered fully. No evidence was produced by the Respondents for claiming compensation for the amount allegedly spent by them on the improvement of land. They have neither produced any receipt nor any witness to support their claim for the improvements made. In this situation, there was no justification to reopen the case merely on the ground that Court below has not properly appreciated the objections of the Respondents. A reading of the concluding para of the Collector's order dated 03.09.2002 shows that it is not a speaking order and the same has been written without application of judicious mind. It has been further argued that it is a settled law that no improvement can be claimed in absence of any documentary or oral evidence which is completely absent in the present case. Respondents wish to prolong the partition proceedings because they are in possession of the excess land. The remand order passed by Collector, Sirsa is against the provisions of Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887. It is also unsustainable in the eyes of law as it has not been passed keeping in view the law laid by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India In this regard. It has been prayed on behalf of the Petitioners that the Revision Petition may be accepted and impugned order dated 27.10.2007 and 25.07.2003 passed by the Lower Revenue Courts may be set aside and the order dated 03.09.2002 passed by Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Sirsa be restored.