SURJIT KAUR Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSTANT writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 23.07.2009 (Annexure P -3) passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeals), Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar whereby appeal filed by respondent no.5 - Joginder Singh has been allowed, order dated 29.09.2008 (Annexure P - 2) passed by the Collector has been set aside and order dated 11.12.2006 passed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade has been upheld. Quashing of the order dated 30.08.2012 (Annexure P -4) passed by respondent no.1 - Financial Commissioner whereby appeal filed by the petitioners has been dismissed, has also been prayed for.

(2.) RESPONDENT no.5 -Joginder Singh filed five applications for partition. Respondent no.4 -Assistant Collector Ist Grade allowed the partition applications after clubbing the same and sanctioned the mode of partition and proceedings were completed ex parte. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(3.) LEARNED senior counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners were staying abroad and instead of serving them personally by way of registered air -mail post, the petitioners were proceeded against ex parte. A report was made by the process -serving agency of the Assistant Collector -Ist Grade that the petitioners are residing abroad. Despite that, they were proceeded against ex parte. Learned senior counsel further contends that the partition was carried out in a zig -zag manner and the petitioners are not in a position to put their land to cultivation. Besides this, no opportunity was afforded to the petitioners to defend their case at the time of partition and the petitioners were not in a position to show their possession over the land which is generally protected to the extent of share of the parties.