NAINSUKH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash order dated 14.7.2008, passed by the Director, Consolidation, Haryana, providing a path to land, owned by respondent nos. 2 and 3.

(2.) An application, was filed by respondent nos. 2 and 3, under section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of fragmentation) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1948 Act"), for providing a path. The petitioner opposed this request by contending that as respondent nos. 2 and 3 are already using a path through the land of respondent nos. 4 and 5, in Rect no.161, Khasra no.18/3 and another path touches their land, they should not be provided a path. Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 pleaded that as the path sought, is their private path, respondent nos. 2 and 3 have no right to claim access through this path but may, if deemed appropriate, be provided some other path.

(3.) After considering the record, the Director, Consolidation, recorded a finding that as land purchased by respondent nos. 2 and 3 was not provided with a path during consolidation, a path be provided from the eastern side of Rect no.161 Khasra no.22/1 measuring 2x2 karams through the land of the petitioner. In turn, the petitioner was provided alternative land, abutting his existing land holdings.