(1.) THIS Writ Petition is directed against the impugned order dated 14-6-2011 passed by the District Collector, East District, filed as Annexure P-1 to the Writ Petition, by which mutation proceedings in respect of title property described in the parcha khatian, Annexure P-2, was kept on hold directing the petitioner and the objectors-respondents 2 to 8 to approach the Civil Court for relief.
(2.) MR . Gulshan Rai Nagpal, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the Sub-Registrar ought to have allowed the mutation as prayed for as the documents undoubtedly establishes that the property is owned and is recorded in the name of the husband of the petitioner, and that such vague order will result in the petitioner languishing without a decision by the Civil Court in the event the respondent Nos. 2 to 8 fail to approach the Civil Court for deciding the dispute.
(3.) HAVING heard the learned Counsel and having perused the pleadings and the documents available in the records, I find that the question for determination in the present case is quite limited and, contrary to what Mr. Moulik has submitted, the question for determination in this case is a question of law as to whether the impugned order of the District Collector is in consonance with the Rules as referred to by the learned Additional Advocate General. This Court certainly has the jurisdiction to decide such question. It is all the moreso, as there is no statutory remedy provided under the Rules against such orders. In my view, it will be a travesty of justice if this Court does not step in aid and leave the citizens to suffer without a remedy.