JASVIR SINGH Vs. HARPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are interconnected revision petitions and have been filed under Section 16(1) of the Punjab Land Revenue Act against the order dated 5.11.2001 of the Divisional Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala.

(2.) BRIEF facts of both the revision petitions are that District Collector Fatehgarh Sahib as per his order dated 21.8.2001 after considering the claims of all the candidates appointed Harpal Singh as Harijan Lambardar of Village Nasrali and ordered for the issuance of 'Sanad' to him. The petitioners challenged that order before Divisional Commissioner who after listening to the parties refused to interfere and upheld the order of the District Collector on 5.11.2001. Hence, the Revision petition. When these revision petitions came up for hearing on 10.7.2002, the then F.C. Appeals ordered that impugned order of the Divisional Commissioner will remain under stay till disposal of both the revision petitions. Shri Harpal Singh filed Writ Petition No. 11514 of 2002 before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The Hon'ble Court while disposing of the Writ held that there was no justification to interfere in the interim order passed by the Revisional Authority. However, in view of the fact that the petitioner had been restrained by the revisional authority in discharging his duties against the post on which he has been appointed, the Court ordered that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 will try to dispose of the petition expeditiously as far as possible and preferably within 3 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of that order. When this case came up for hearing on 24.7.2003 the counsel for the respondent requested that since it is an old case, some early date may be fixed to decide the case. His request was accepted and this case was fixed for arguments. When the case came up for hearing the counsels requested that it may be decided on the basis of the arguments already filed by them previously.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out even a single point which has not been discussed earlier. Moreover, I am also of the view that unless there is something significantly wrong or irregular, the choice of the District Collector should not be disturbed in such matters. In view of my above discussion, I am unable to find any merit in both the revision petitions and accordingly same are dismissed. A copy of this order be placed on both the files for record. To be communicated. Revisions dismissed.