NIRMAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-Nirmal Singh is aggrieved of the impugned orders dated 22.06.2009 (Annexure P-13), dated 06.11.2009 (Annexure P- 14), dated 03.03.2010 (Annexure P-15), dated 09.05.2012 (Annexure P-16), dated 21.05.2013 (Annexure P-17) to contend that in application moved by Manjinder Singh-respondent No.6 who is represented by Mr. Inderjit Sharma, Advocate, partition of 322 kanals and 17 marlas was sought. The Assistant Collector, Grade-I, Tehsildar, Bathinda-respondent No.5 vide order dated 10.10.2006 accepted the mode of partition.

(2.) Both the parties were not aggrieved of the mode of partition but while conducting khatauni pamaish (Annexure P-13), more area of land, of inferior quality, has fallen to the share of the petitioner than that of Manjinder Singh and this fact is evident from the report dated 16.11.2007 of Kanungo Halqa Sangat, whereby it has been mentioned that khasra Nos.112-113-110-120-121-122 are Sandy i.e. of inferior quality. No doubt there is a tubewell bore of petitioner on khasra No.113/1 which is measuring 50 x 50 feet which has fallen to the share of the petitioner owing to possession but on going through the calculations of aforementioned khasra numbers which are of inferior quality as indicated in Annexure P-13, the details of which are given herein below, petitioner is seriously prejudiced on account of such loss:-

(3.) On perusal of chart, it is submitted that petitioner is getting more inferior area i.e. 41 kanals whereas Manjinder Singh has got 28 kanals 2 marlas. In my view, grievance of the petitioner is justified. Naksha and Khatauni Pamaish have been prepared by taking into consideration the mode of partition.