SATBIR SINGH Vs. GRAM PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of the case in brief are that mutation No. 772 of Mauza Mirakpur, Hadbast No. 30 was sanctioned in favour of Panchayat Deh by the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Sonipat vide his order dated 23.3.1993. Appeal against the order of the Assistant Collector was dismissed by the Collector, Sonipat, vide his order dated 4.10.1994. Aggrieved by the orders of Assistant Collector 2nd Grade and the Collector, Satbir Singh and others, petitioners filed a revision petition before the Commissioner, Rohtak Division, Rohtak, who vide his order dated 7.3.1996 has made a reference to the Financial Commissioner with the recommendation that the order dated 23.3.1993 and 4.10.1994 passed by the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade and Collector, Sonipat respectively be set aside.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade had sanctioned the mutation of land belonging to shamlat deh in favour of Panchayat deh in view of the Instructions contained in letter No. 5498 dated 15.5.1992 issued by the Director of Land Records Haryana. These Instructions had been issued in view of the Amendment Act No. 9 of 1992. This Amendment Act was challenged before the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court who have set aside this Amendment Act in case Jai Singh and others v. State of Haryana and others, 1995 PLJ 83 : 1995(1) RRR 623 (P&H)(FB) and this has been cited in the ruling 1995-PLJ-83 : 1995(1) RRR 623 (P&H)(FB); and it is in the light of this judgment of the Hon'ble High Court that the Commissioner, Rohtak Division has made this reference recommending that the order sanctioning mutation No. 772 should be set aside. He urged that the reference made by the Commissioner may be accepted and the order dated 23.3.1993 passed by the Assistant Collector and order dated 4.10.1994 passed by the Collector, Sonipat should be set aside.

(3.) I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for both the parties. The mutation in question No. 772 of Mauja Mirakpur Hadbast No. 30, District Sonipat was sanctioned vide the order dated 23.3.1993 of the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Sonipat on the basis of the Instructions contained in letter No. 5498 dated 15.5.1992 issued by the Director Land Records, Haryana. These Instructions were based on the Amendment Act No. 9 of 1992. This Amendment Act has since been held ultra vires of the Constitution by the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in case Jai Singh and others v. State of Haryana and others and Ruling 1995-PLJ-83 : 1995(1) RRR 623 (P&H)(FB) has been cited in this respect. Thus, the Commissioner, Rohtak Division, Rohtak has rightly made a reference recommending that the order dated 23.3.1993 passed by the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade Sonipat should be set aside. Accordingly, I accept the reference made by Commissioner, Rohtak Division and set aside the orders dated 23.3.1993 and 4.10.1994 passed by the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Sonipat and Collector, Sonipat, respectively. Announced. Reference accepted. Petition allowed.