HARBHAJAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant petition is directed against the order dated 1.10.2012, passed by the learned Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar, whereby revision petition of the petitioner filed against the order dated 24.8.2012 passed by the Collector, Gurdaspur, upholding the order dated 15.7.2011 passed by Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Dina Nagar, ordering correction of khasra girdawari in favour of respondent No. 5, was dismissed, thereby upholding the orders passed by the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Dina Nagar, as well as the appellate order passed by the learned Collector, Gurdaspur. The brief facts of the case, as noticed by learned Commissioner in his order dated 1.10.2012 Annexure P -5, are that respondent No. 5 moved an application before Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Gurdaspur, for the correction of khasra girdawari. The case was transferred by District Collector, Gurdaspur, to Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Dina Nagar, on the request of the petitioner. After conducting spot inspection, Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Dina Nagar, decided the case in favour of respondent No. 5, on 31.5.2010. This order was challenged by the petitioner before the Collector, Gurdaspur, who remanded the case back to Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Dina Nagar. He summoned all the necessary parties and also visited the spot on 13.7.2011, in the presence of respectables of the village. Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Dina Nagar, during the course of his inspection at the spot, found that respondent No. 5 was in possession of the disputed land. Accordingly, he ordered to correct the entries of khasra girdawari from the crop Rabi 2010 in the name of respondent No. 5, vide his order dated 15.7.2011.

(2.) DISSATISFIED , petitioner filed appeal, which was dismissed by the learned Collector, Gurdaspur, vide order dated 24.8.2012 observing that after the purchase of the land by respondent No. 5 and also sanctioning of mutation in her name, petitioner could not clarify as to how he came into possession over the suit land. Thereafter, petitioner filed his revision petition under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, against the order dated 24.8.2012 passed by the learned Collector, Gurdaspur. The revision petition filed by the petitioner came to be dismissed, vide order dated 1.10.2012 (Annexure P -5) by the learned Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent authorities, while passing their respective orders, have proceeded on a misconceived approach, ordering the correction of khasra girdawari in favour of respondent No. 5. He further submits that the petitioner was in cultivating possession over the disputed land and the impugned orders are illegal. He concluded by submitting that the impugned orders passed by the respondents were not sustainable in law and the writ petition deserves to be allowed.