LONGU Vs. JNDHVIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition under section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act (hereinafter called the Act) has been filed before me by Shri Longu against the orders of the learned Commissioner, dated 30 -10 -75, whereby he upheld the orders of the Settlement Collector, Kangra dated 25 -3 -1975 and rejected the appeal of the present petitioner.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the present petitioner moved an application before the Assistant Collector IInd Grade (Tebsildar), Kangra for the correction of khasra girdawari entries in respect of certain khasra Nos. The Assistant Collector, IInd Grade allowed the application and ordered that the entries in the khasra girdawari for Kharif, 1973 and Rabi, 1974 in respect of land comprising khasra No. 154 min, measuring 0 -21 -63 hectares be recorded in favour of the applicant/petitioner as Gair Mauroosi Gala Batai Nisfi. This application was decided by the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade under the provisions of Chapter IX of the Land Records Manual. Aggrieved by these orders, Shri Judhvir Singh and others filed an appeal before the Settlement Collector, who after hearing the parties held that as no proper enquiry as required under section 36 of the Act was conducted by the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade the application cannot be treated to have been processed under this section of the Act. This was according to him, a legal infirmity in the order. He, therefore, referred the matter to arbitration under section 127 of the Act. This order was agitated by the present petitioner in an appeal before the learned Commissioner on the grounds that the Settlement Collector had erred in holding that the correction could be ordered under section 36 of the Act ; and that he could not refer the matter to arbitration under section 127 of the Act, for there was no dispute before him. The learned Commissioner dismissed the appeal holding that the order of the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade was erroneous as he had decided the application under Chapter IX of the Land Records Manual instead of section 36 of the Act. He further held that the Settlement Collector was fully competent to refer the matter to arbitration as the appeal was In the nature of a rehearing of the entire matter, and this had kept the dispute alive. It is against this order of the learned Commissioner that the present proceedings have arisen before me

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties in detail and have considered the records of the case carefully.