Delhi High Court
Rai Singh vs The Divisional Commissioner And ... on 25 August, 2005
Author: P Nandrajog
Bench: P Nandrajog
ORDER
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.
W.P. (C) No. 13146/2005 and CM No. 10029/2005
1. Grievance of the petitioner is to the effect that certified copy of Resolution No. 356 dated 1.7.2003, Village Pooth Khurd, Delhi, copy whereof was applied vide Receipt No. 524 dated 2.3.2005 is not being supplied to the petitioner. Petitioner needs a certified copy for the reason 10 Biswa of land comprised in Khasra No. 154/36 has been withdrawn and in lieu thereof, 10 Biswa of land comprised in Khasra No. 154/56 has been allotted to the petitioner. Petitioner wants to challenge the same.
2. Petitioner requires certified copy of the resolution and consequential order passed thereto giving effect to the resolution for the purposes of filing a revision before the Financial Commissioner under Section 42 of The East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948.
3. As per rules, revision needs to be accompanied by a certified copy of the order/resolution which is impugned.
Section 42 of The East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, reads as under:
'Power of Chief Commissioner to call for proceedings--The Chief Commissioner may at any time for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any order passed, scheme prepared or confirmed or repatriation made by any officer under this Act call for and examine the record of any case pending before or disposed of by such officer and may pass such order in reference thereto as it thinks fit:
Provided that no order, scheme or repatriation shall be varied or reserved without giving the parties interested notice to appear and opportunity to be heard, except in cases where the Chief Commissioner is satisfied that the proceedings have been vitiated by unlawful consideration.'
5. A perusal of Section. 42 shows that Chief Commissioner is empowered to satisfy himself as to the legality or propriety of any order or scheme at any stage of consolidation and for the said purpose can call for and examine the record of any case pending or disposed of by the Consolidation Officer.
6. Since the petitioner is not being supplied with a certified copy of the Resolution against which the petitioner has a grievance and the consequential order, in my opinion, considering the language of Section 42, writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the Financial Commissioner to entertain the petitioner's revision, without the same being accompanied by a certified copy of the resolution or the consequential order for the reason jurisdiction vested under Section 42 in the Financial Commissioner is a revisional jurisdiction and the learned Financial Commissioner can call for the record pertaining to which the grievance is raised.
7. If the petitioner were to file a revision petition before the learned Financial Commissioner without enclosing therewith a certified copy of the impugned resolution and the consequential order passed thereon, revision petition would not be dismissed as not maintainable. Learned Financial Commissioner would summon the record of the Consolidation Officer and would proceed to decide the revision on merits.
8. Writ petition stands disposed of.
9. Learned Financial Commissioner would treat the present order as applicable to all revisions filed before him. He would intimate to his registry that when revisions are filed under Section 42 of The East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, they would be entertained even in the absence of certified copy of the impugned resolutions/orders being enclosed with the writ petition.
10. dusty.
