SHIV KUMAR Vs. NIKKU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - This is a reference by the Commissioner Hisar Division recommending to set aside the orders of the Collector as well as of the Assistant Collector IInd Grade, Ellenabad dated 22.1.1993 and 8.11.1990 respectively, in a correction of Khasra Girdawari case.

(2.) FACTS of the case are that the respondent Nikku Ram had moved an application before the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade, Ellenabad for correction of khasra girdawari in respect of 32 kanal agricultural land situated in village Sultanpuria, Tehsil and District Sirsa from Kharif of 1988 onwards. The Assistant Collector, IInd Grade vide his order dated 8.11.1990 ordered correction of khasra girdawari in favour of the respondent Nikku Ram. The petitioners Shiv Kumar and others then filed an appeal before the Collector, Ellenabad for setting aside the order of Assistant Collector, IInd Grade dated 8.11.1990, that the petitioners had been cultivating the disputed land through servants, and that they owned a Dera in the village and had tractors, tubewells connections. and other instruments/implements for use in their agricultural operations, that some of the co-sharers of the petitioners were not served notices as they had been away to Calcutta in connection with marriage of some of their relations when the Assistant Collector IInd Grade decided the case vide order dated 8.11.1990 and that the impugned order is non-speaking. The Collector, Ellenabad found that the Jamabandi 1989-90 had been prepared during the pendency of the application for correction of khasra girdawari. He was of the view that the revenue officers have no jurisdiction to decide such cases which should be adjudicated upon by the Civil Court. Accordingly he dismissed their appeal and directed the parties to seek their remedy before the Civil Court vide his orders dated 22.1.1993. The petitioner Shiv Kumar etc. then filed a revision before the Commissioner, Hisar Division against the order dated 22.1.1993 and 8.11.1990 of the Collector and the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade, respectively. The Commissioner, Hisar Division found that some of the necessary parties had not been impleaded/served; and that on 20.8.1990 the Presiding Officer was on leave and the case was adjourned for 7.9.1990 but the orders on application were passed on 22.8.1990 which is a material irregularity. Further the Commissioner found that the Collector's orders show that he had come to a specific finding that during the pendency of the Girdawari case before the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade, Jamabandi for 1989-90 was prepared--that being so,used the correction of girdawari for prior period since 1988 onwards should not have been taken up by the lower Court. And that having accepted this fact, the Collector should have accepted the appeal, adjourned the proceedings sine die and asked the parties to seek their remedy in the Civil Court, which clearly shows that the Collector failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in him. Hence this recommendation.

(3.) THE counsel for the respondent has submitted before me that his client had made an application for correction of khasra girdawari before Assistant Collector, IInd Grade in May, 1990 whereas the order was passed in November, 1990. When the application for correction was made, the Jamabandi for 1989-90 was under preparation and was not finalised. Hence, the order of the Collector as well as Commissioner, saying that the Jamabandi was finalised for the year 1989-90 and the parties could seek the remedy only in the Civil Court is not correct. l have earlier decided in several cases and other Financial Commissioners have also held the same view that when the khasra girdawari correction application is pending, the preparation of Jamabandi for that year would not prevent correction of khasra girdawari entries as entered in the Jamabandi.