GURDIAL SINGH Vs. MOHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . The present case has been reported by Sh. Dinesh Chandra, IAS, Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar, under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 against the order of the Collector, Patti dated 27.9.1984, with his opinion that the present revision petition be accepted and order dated 27.9.1984 passed by the Collector, Patti and the order dated 23.1.1984, passed by the A.C. II Grade, Patti be set aside, mutation No. 24 of village Sabhra, Tehsil Patti, District Amritsar be declared as contested one, and the same be decided by the A.C. I Grade, after hearing all the concerned parties, as per reference dated 26.11.1985.

(2.) IN brief, the relevant facts of the this case are that Bela Singh, Kapur Singh, Sucha Singh along with several others jointly owned some land in village Sabhra. On 11.6.1981, as per registered sale deed, Kapur Singh, Sucha Singh had sold Khasra No. 17/10 measuring 8 Kanals to the petitioners. Later on, the same very Khasra number was sold by the Bela Singh to respondent- Mohan Singh as per the registered sale deed, dated 5.9.1983. On the basis of the registered sale deed, dated 5.9.1983, mutation No. 24 of village Sabhra, Tehsil Patti District Amritsar relating to land measuring 14 K-9 MK. comprised in Khasra No. 17/10 and 6K-9M comprised in Khasra No. 16/6 was entered by the Halqua Patwari which was sanctioned by A.C IInd Grade, Patti as per his order dated 23.1.1984. The petitioners Gurdial Singh etc. filed an appeal before the Collector, Patti which was dismissed, as per Collector's order dated 27.9.1984 and the petitioners were advised to go to the Civil Court to seek requisite relief. Aggrieved by the order of the Collector, Patti, the petitioners filed a revision petition before the Commissioner, Division Jalandhar, Jalandhar as a result of which, the present case has been reported with the recommendation that the impugned to orders regarding the said mutation No. 24, be set aside and the case be remanded A.C. I Grade for deciding the mutation, afresh, as a contested one.

(3.) AFTER careful consideration of the facts and the circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the present petition has no merit and the same deserves to be rejected. The A.C. IInd Grade, Patti had sanctioned the present mutation on the basis of mutation on that basis, and the field revenue officials are duty bound to enter the mutation on the basis of 'parcha registry'. The observation of the learned Commissioner, Jalandhar Division is correct to the extent that these instructions regarding the issuance of 'parcha registry' do exist, but in actual practice, the movement and follow up the 'parcha registry' are not being effectively monitored, and normally, the Halqua Patwari enter the mutations only when the documents are presented to them.