High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/3161/2015dismissed

Jatinder Singh & ORS v. Director Land Records Pb Jalandhar & ORS

2015-02-23Ms. Justice Navita Singh,Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.3161 of 2015 Date of Decision: February 23, 2015 Jatinder Singh and others .....Petitioners versus Director, Land Records, Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH.

Present:Mr.G.S.Nagra, Advocate, for the petitioners. -.-

1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioners moved a petition under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, in the year 2009, inter-alia, alleging that at the time of consolidation which took place in the years 1984-85, Khasra No.611 was required to be allotted to them but by mistake it was allotted to private-respondents, whereas Khasra No.649 ought to have been allotted to privaterespondents instead of the petitioners. The Director, Land Records, Punjab, vide the impugned order dated 05.11.2014, has dismissed the petitioners' petition, inter-alia, on the grounds that there has been no deficiency in the allotment of good quality land to the petitioners in a particular block and that if their plea is taken to its logical conclusion, the respondents will be left with no passage to their land.

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.03.10 12:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.3161 of 2015 [2] We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners at a considerable length with reference to the site-plan (Annexure P-5).

In view of the fact that at the time of consolidation, the petitioners were allotted a compact piece of land comprising Khasra Nos.609, 610, 612, 641, 643 and 649 etc., we are satisfied that allocation of land to the petitioners and private-respondents in different blocks is just, fair and equitable. No interference in the impugned order is thus called for.

Dismissed.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE February 23, 2015 [RAJ MOHAN SINGH] Mohinder JUDGE MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.03.10 12:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh