HEM RAJ Vs. PAWAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Hem Raj and others have challenged the order dated 13 -1 -1988 of the Commissioner, Mandi Division, through this appeal.

(2.) The facts of the case briefly stated are that Shri Pawan Kumar, respondent preferred an application for correction of Khasra Girdwari entries in respect of land comprised in Khasra No 89/1, measuring 355 80 Sq meters, situated in Muhal Purani Mandi, before the Assistant Collector, II Grade, Mandi, on the ground that he was in cultivating possession of the land under the present appellants on payment of rent at the rate of Rs. 20 per annum. When the case had been fixed for the evidence of the parties by the Assistant Collector, II Grade, an appeal was filed by the present appellants before the Sub -Divisional Collector, Mandi. stating that the Assistant Collector below had wrongly proceeded to correct the entries of Jamabandi. The learned Sub -Divisional Collector, Mandi, after hearing the parties, accepted the appeal vide his order dated 17 -12 -1987 on the ground that the entries already existing in the revenue record could not be corrected Shri Pawaa Kumar, present respondent filed an appeal against this order before the Divisional Commissioner, Mandi, who accepted the same vide his order dated 13 -1 -1988 and remanded the case to the Land Reforms Officer Tehsildar, exercising the powers of the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade), Mandi with the directions that the dispute be determined by him after affording full opportunity to ail concerned The appellants have come in appeal under section 14 of the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act against this order of the learned Commissioner, Mandi Division.

(3.) We heard the arguments on 21 -10 -1991. On that day the learned Counsel for the appellant No. 1 requested that permission be given for filing written arguments, copy of which would be provided to the learned Counsel for the respondent Till this day, no written arguments have been received in this Court. As such, we have decided to take a view on the appeal on the basis of the record and the oral arguments. The perusal of record reveals that Shri Pawan Kumar, respondent had filed an application for correction of entries of Jamabandi. The learned Sub -Divisional Collector bad failed to appreciate that the Khasra Girdwari entries are to be corrected from time to time as per the provisions contained in Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act. The order of the Sub -Divisional Collector also suffers from another irregularity. Shri Hem Singh, one of the appellants before the Sub -Divisional Collector, died when the case was pending before him. The present appellants did not take any step to bring legal heirs of Shri Hem Singh, deceased on record and as such the appeal of the respondent had abated. The learned Commissioner in his impugned order observed that the present case happened to be clear dispute regarding tenancy and Shri Pawan Kumar had asked for recording his right in the Khasra Girdwars after establishing his case. As already held by this Court in 1984 -SLC -77 that such dispute is required to be determined by the competent Court i - e. Land Reforms Officer. As such, the learned Collector adopted the right course in remanding the case to the Land Reforms Officer (Tehsildar, exercising the powers of Assistant Collector, 1st Grade) for determining the dispute of tenancy after giving reasonable opportunity to the parties of being heard. We find no reason to interfere with this order. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed and the order dated 13 -1 -1988 of the Commissioner, Mandi Division, is upheld. Order be communicated Appeal dismissed.