SARWAN Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order dated 13.2.2009 passed by learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Himachal Pradesh in Revision Petition No.250 of 1995, this writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash and set aside the same with further direction to respondents No.5 and 6 to correct the revenue record of land bearing Khasra No.1229/1 and Khata No.18 in terms of the order Annexure P-1 passed by the 6th respondent in an application registered as File No.54/91/80.

(2.) Complaint is that the well reasoned and speaking orders Annexures P-1 and P-2 passed by the 6th and 5th respondents respectively have been erroneously quashed and set aside by the 1st respondent while deciding the revision petition preferred by respondents No.2 to 4, who allegedly have no right, title or interest in the land in dispute. The wholesale remand of the matter is also not legally justified.

(3.) The stand of the respondents as emerges from reply to the writ petition is that Shri Kartar Chand, respondent in the correction application had sold the land in dispute vide sale deed No.674 dated 7.6.1991 to respondents No.2 to 4 and they having stepped into the shoes of said Kartar Chand, were necessary party in the present lis. The petitioner, however, obtained the correction order without impleading them as party in the correction application and behind their back. The correction in the revenue record pertaining to Khasra No.1229/1 and Khata No.18 situated in Mauja Sanjhot, Tehsil and District Una was ordered by the 6th respondent erroneously behind their back and in appeal the 5th respondent while upholding the order Annexure P-1 passed by the 6th respondent has also concluded erroneously that respondents No.2 to 4 being not party in the correction application and rather the owner of the land in dispute, Shri Kartar Chand was impleaded as respondent in those proceedings were not necessary parties and as such dismissed the appeal, they preferred, erroneously.