KARPAL SINGH Vs. DIRECTOR CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ of certiorari, quashing order dated 01.12.1992 (Annexure P-8), passed by the Director, Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab, Chandigarh (exercising power under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

(2.) A notice informing him of the date fixed for arguments was ordered to be served on contesting respondent No.2. The notice was received back served but as respondent No.2 did not to enter appearance, a second notice was ordered to be served. The second notice has been received back with the report that respondent No.2 is out of the country. As respondent No.2 has chosen not to enter appearance, despite knowledge that the case is fixed for arguments, we have appraised his reply and proceed to decide the writ petition.

(3.) A perusal of the reply, filed by respondent No.2, reveals that respondent No.2 has averred that he claimed a passage through the land of respondent No.3 on the premise that no path was allotted during consolidation but as respondent No.3 had already constructed a room, the path has been validly allotted from the petitioner's land after holding that a path was not allotted during consolidation.