MUKHTIAR KAUR Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Affidavit of Buta Singh son of Mukhtiar Singh filed in Court today, is taken on record. Instant writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the orders dated 10.08.2010 (Annexure P-7) passed by respondent No. 1-Financial Commissioner, Revenue Punjab, dated 19.02.2008 (Annexure P-6) passed by respondent No. 2-Commissioner, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur, dated 30.12.2005 (Annexure P-5) passed by respondent No. 3-Collector, Gidderbaha and dated 18.07.2005 (Annexure P-4) passed by respondent No. 4-Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Gidderbaha, in partition proceeding.

(2.) In brief, facts relevant for disposal of the present writ petition are to the effect that respondent No. 5-Karam Singh filed application for partition of land measuring 360 kanals 17 marlas, situated within revenue limits of village Surewala, Tehsil Gidderbaha, District Muktsar. The Assistant Collector-Ist Grade, Gidderbaha gave notice to the parties and afforded opportunity to file reply. Thereafter, respondent No. 4 allowed the continuation of partition proceedings. Naksha 'Ura' was called and objections thereon were also heard. Statements of parties were recorded before framing mode of partition. After considering the statements, mode of partition was approved whereby it was mentioned that entire agricultural land will be partitioned excluding the gair mumkin land. One 'tak' of the applicant, second 'tak' of respondents No. 11 to 13, third 'tak' of respondent No. 15 and 4th 'tak' of remaining respondents before A.C-Ist Grade were ordered to be carved out. Mode of partition was also approved. Thereafter, Naksha 'Bey' was called. Parties were afforded opportunity to file objections to Naksha 'Bey'. The petitioners filed objections to Naksha 'Bey' on 04.07.2005 which were dismissed by A.C-Ist Grade holding that they had failed to show as to out of which khasra number, they had been given less land. It was also held that Naksha 'Bey' is in accordance with the mode of partition. Thereafter, Naksha' Jeem' was also passed and direction was also issued to prepare 'Sanand Takseem' (instrument of partition). Against the impugned order (Annexure P-4) passed by A.C-Ist Grade, appeal was preferred by the petitioners which has been dismissed by the Collector, vide impugned order dated 30.12.2005 (Annexure P-5). The revision petition filed by the petitioners has also been dismissed by the Commissioner, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur vide impugned order dated 19.02.2008 (Annexure P-6). Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners filed revision before the Financial Commissioner, Revenue Punjab after delay of 637 days which has also been dismissed vide order dated 10.08.2010 (Annexure P-7). Hence, this writ petition.

(3.) Upon notice, respondents No. 1 to 4 filed their written statement with the averments that all the proceedings have been done in accordance with law. Respondent No. 5 and respondents No. 18(i) to 18 (iii) filed their separate written statements with the averments that partition has been carried out by the authorities in accordance with law. Everyone has been heard and opportunity to file objections to Naksha 'Bey' has been afforded. It is one of the objections taken by respondent No. 5 that the petitioners have concealed the fact of filing of civil suit challenging the order passed by the revenue authorities in partition proceedings and stay was sought with regard to implementation of impugned order dated 18.07.2005 (Annexure P-4).