PHOOL SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Gulzar Singh respondent filed a petition under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holding (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, (hereafter the Act) on January 15, 1976, alleging that path No. 389 in village Sambhalka (Keshav Pur), Tehsil and District Ambala in 1957 is located at a very inconvenient place and is being misused and as such should be deleted. The Director Consolidation issued notice to the Gram Panchayat and thereafter allowed the petition by condoning the delay of 18 years vide order dated May 18, 1976 (P-2). The petitioner has assailed the order P-2 in the present writ petition.

(2.) The observations of the Director of Consolidation in the impugned order relating to the condonation of delay of 18 years filing the petition by Gulzar Singh respondent under Section 42 of the Act are :-

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that path No. 389 was provided by the Consolidation authorities for enabling the petitioner for going to his field No. 90/7 measuring 8 Kanals and the petitioner is using the path since then. The argument proceeds that apart from the fact that the petitioner being an interested party was not issued notice, the Director Consolidation illegally exercised the discretion in condoning the delay of 18 years on the ground that the path in dispute was superficial which was causing inconvenience to Gulzar Singh respondent and its change will be condusive to better intensive cultivation. Reliance has been placed on S. Gurdial Singh & others v. The State of Punjab and others,1967 PunLR 689. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner must prevail.