Rajesh & ORS v. State Of Haryana And ORS

CWP No.10182 of 2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.10182 of 2017 Date of Decision.12.05.2017 Smt. Rajesh and others ........Petitioner Vs The State of Haryana and others ........Respondents

Present:

Mr. Rakesh Lathwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL -.- AMIT RAWAL J.(ORAL) Notice of motion.

Mr. Saurabh Girdhar, AAG, Haryana accepts notice. The grievance of the petitioner is owing to the notification dated 10.04.2017 promulgated by the State of Haryana giving the powers to the Commissioner to deal with matters with regard to sanad takseem. The petitioner had challenged the order of the Commissioner and the Collector by filing the ROR before the Financial Commissioner but the same was not entertained owing to the aforementioned notification. It is in this aspect of the matter, this Court requested Mr. B.R. Mahajan, A.G., Haryana to apprise this Court about the predicament of such litigants.

The notification is silent with regard to its applicability, thus, in my view, it would apply prospectively. Even otherwise the order of the Collector being merged in the order of the Commissioner has been assailed before the Financial Commissioner and particularly when the petitioner had to challenge the sanad takseem, the power is only with the Financial PANKAJ KUMAR 2017.05.22 14:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP No.10182 of 2017 -2Commissioner as per Section 16(1) of the Punjab Land Revenue Act and as well as in view of the judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in Amar Khan and others Vs. State of Punjab and others 2009(1) RCR (Civil) 741.

After hearing Mr. Mahajan, I am of the view that the petitioner has an efficacious remedy of filing ROR as the notification dated 10.04.2017 would apply prospectively to the new cases instituted seeking partition of the land and not in the matters which are pending adjudication. Resultantly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file the revision petition. The petitioner is directed to file the ROR in view of the aforementioned observations and in case such revision petition is filed, the Financial Commissioner shall decide the same in accordance with law.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE May 12, 2017 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No PANKAJ KUMAR 2017.05.22 14:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document