SUKHDEV SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved by the judgment handed down by learned Single Judge on 21/3/2016, whereby Civil Writ Petition No.18737 of 2014, filed by the appellants for seeking the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, setting-aside the order as passed by respondent No.1-Financial Commissioner, Punjab on 9/7/2014 (Annexure P-15), qua the dismissal of the revision-petition moved by them (appellants) and the order, rendered by respondent No.2-the Divisional Commissioner, Patiala on 29/8/2012 (Annexure P-13), accepting the revision-petition, as filed by respondentNo.5 to assail the orders Annexures P-10 and P-11 passed by respondent No.4-Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Payal and respondent No.3-Collector, Sub Division, Jagraon on 16/11/2011 and 19/6/2012 respectively, has been dismissed and the appellants have been burdened with the costs to the tune of Rs.2,00,000.00, payable to respondent No.5 and have also been imposed another sum of Rs.50,000.00 as costs to be deposited with the District Legal Services Authority, Ludhiana, they (appellants) have chosen to prefer the instant Letters Patent Appeal to lay challenge to the same.

(2.) Shorn and short of unnecessary details, the facts, as emanating from the perusal of the file and culminating in the filing of the present appeal, are that the appellants filed the above-said Civil Writ Petition against the orders Annexures P-15 & P-13, while averring that they had filed application Annexure P-1 under Sec. 123 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (for short 'the Act of 1887') for seeking the partition of the land measuring 59 Kanals 05 Marlas, situated in Village Gureh (for short 'the subject land') in accordance with the agreement dtd. 31/5/1988. The Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Jagraon passed an order on the afore-mentioned application on 13/11/2006 regarding staying his hands from deciding the same, in view of the pendency of the Civil Suit between the parties. The appellants preferred an appeal before respondent No.3 against the above-referred order who, vide order Annexure P-3 dtd. 30/5/2007, accepted the same by way of setting-aside the order dtd. 13/11/2006 and remanding the case to respondent No.4 for deciding it afresh after affording opportunity to both the parties to produce evidence and hearing them.

(3.) In pursuance of order Annexure P-3, respondent No.4 passed the order Annexure P-6 on 12/10/2009 for preparation of 'Sanad Taksim' (final instrument of partition). However, respondent No.5 filed an appeal against the afore-said order, which was dismissed by respondent No.3 on 17/6/2010 vide the order Annexure P-7. Then, respondent No.5 availed the statutory remedy under Sec. 16 of the Act of 1887 by moving a revision- petition before respondent No.2 and it was also rejected on 14/6/2011 vide order Annexure P-8. Thereafter, respondent No.5 approached this Court by way of filing CWP No.13993 of 2011, which was allowed on 4/8/2011 vide the order Annexure P-9 and the parties were asked to appear before the present respondent No.4, who was directed to pass the fresh order after hearing the parties and considering their respective objections/arguments.