BALWINDER Vs. COMMISSIONER, ROHTAK DIVISION, ROHTAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing Order dated 8.11.2007 (Annexure P-3) passed by the City Magistrate -cum-Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Panipat; order dated 29.2.2008 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Collector, Panipat; and Order dated 18.7.2008 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Commissioner, Rohtak Division, Rohtak.

(2.) Facts in seriatim of events in brief are that respondent No. 4, Gram Panchayat, Sodapur, Tehsil Madlauda, District Panipat, filed an application under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (as applicable to Haryana) (for short, 'the Act'), in the year 1997 against the petitioners seeking possession of the land while claiming that the land is shamilat deh. The petition/application was decided by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Panipat, vide 25.2.1997 (Annexure P-8).

(3.) Order dated 25.2.1997 (Annexure P-8) reads as under :-File has been put up. Case was called. Counsel for the respondent is present. No one has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. After perusal of the file, it revealed that the petitioner has failed to produce any evidence for a sufficient long time and despite imposing cost the evidence has not been completed. Now the court time is over. Case was called again but neither the petitioner nor any counsel has appeared. So, it appears that the petitioner does not want to pursue the present case. So, the case is dismissed for non-prosecution. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.