GURBAX SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner and respondent Nos.16 to 18 purchased land measuring 17 bighas 18 biswas on 21.5.1957 from the original land owner, namely, Ram Chander Bhatia, who was a big land owner. The land at the hand of Ram Chander Bhatia was declared surplus on 31.1.1961. The petitioner and respondent Nos.16 to 18 were recorded as owners and mutation was also sanctioned on 24.9.1959 on the basis of sale deed dated 21.7.1957.

(2.) It is alleged that the State of Haryana, without notice to C.M. NO.9926 OF 2012 & the petitioner or respondent Nos.16 to 18 sanctioned mutation of the land in question on 11.1.1983, divesting the petitioner and respondent Nos.16 to 18 of their title. The petitioner moved an application on 17.1.1985, claiming to be bonafide purchaser, which was declared surplus but the said application was dismissed. Appeal against this order passed was dismissed by the Collector, Karnal, on 30.1.1986. The petitioner impugned both the orders by filing a revision, which was dismissed on 1.6.1988. The Financial Commissioner also dismissed the revenue revision on 7.8.1999 by observing that the sale deed was not produced on the file. The land in question, thus, was utilised by ignoring the established facts, as per which, the land is still in possession of the petitioner and respondent Nos.16 to 18. The petitioner accordingly has filed the present writ petition and pleads that his case is fully covered by some of the precedents cited and referred to in the petition.

(3.) While issuing notice of motion, this Court ordered that status-quo be maintained in regard to possession till further orders. The writ petition was finally admitted on 22.3.2001. Now an application is moved by respondent No.15 for vacation of the statusquo order passed in this case. It was considered essential to decide the main writ petition instead of considering the issue of vacation of the interim order. The parties accordingly have been heard.