Punjab-Haryana High Court
Asha Chauhan vs State Of Haryana And Others on 20 April, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:055515
CWP-21348-2021(O&M) 1 2023:PHHC:055515
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
***
1. CWP-21348-2021(O&M)
Asha Chauhan
... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
... Respondents
2. CWP-1849-2023
Smt.Kaushalya Chaudhary
... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
... Respondents
Date of decision : 20.04.2023
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr.Abhilaksh Grover, Advocate
for the petitioner in CWP-21348-2021.
Mr.Govind Goel, Advocate and
Mr.Amit Kashyap, Advocate for
for the petitioner in CWP-1849-2023 and
for respondent no.22 in CWP-21348-2021.
Ms.Upasana Dhawan, AAG, Haryana
for respondents no.1 to 3 in CWP-21348-2021 and
for respondents no.1 and 2 in CWP-1849-2023.
Mr.Atul Yadav, Advocate
for respondents no.10 and 21 in CWP-21348-2021.
Mr.Vipin Pal Yadav, Advocate
for respondents no.4,5, 27, 35, 36 and 37 in CWP-21348-2021.
Mr.Danish Davesar, Advocate for
Mr. Vinod Bhardwaj, Advocate
for respondents no.22 and 34 in CWP-21348-2021.
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:055515
CWP-21348-2021(O&M) 2 2023:PHHC:055515
VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL)
1. This order will dispose of two writ petitions i.e., CWP-21348-
2021 filed by Asha Chauhan and CWP-1849-2023 filed by Kaushalya
Chaudhary. Both the cases arises from the same partition proceedings and
with the consent of all the parties, the facts are being taken from CWP-
21348-2021.
2. Petitioner Asha Chauhan had filed a revision petition before the
Commissioner, Gurugram challenging the orders dated 10.07.2020,
14.08.2020 and also Sanad Taksim dated 04.06.2021. The Commissioner
had observed that the said orders were passed by the Assistant Collector 2 nd
Grade and accordingly had permitted the petitioners to challenge the said
orders before the Collector and had not entertained the revision. On
14.10.2021, a coordinate Bench of this Court was pleased to pass the
following order:-
"The petitioner had challenged the final order of partition
dated 04.06.2021 (Annexure P-2) before the concerned
Commissioner, however, the challenge has failed. The petitioner
has been relegated to the remedy of approaching the Collector in
the first instance upon mis-reading of Section 16 of the Punjab
Land Revenue Act, 1887 (as applicable to the Haryana State).
It is submitted that no remedy is available before the
Collector. Sanad can only be challenged by way of revision before
the Commissioner.
Notice of motion for 24.01.2022.
Mr. R.K.S. Brar, Addl. AG, Haryana, accepts notice on
behalf of respondents No.1 and 3 and waives service.
Remaining respondents be served in ordinary manner.
Meanwhile, dispossession of the petitioner shall remain
stayed.
(SUDHIR MITTAL)
JUDGE
14.10.2021"
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:055515
CWP-21348-2021(O&M) 3 2023:PHHC:055515
and the State have jointly submitted that since, in the present case the
partition proceeding had been initiated after the year 2017 i.e., on
06.11.2018, thus, it would be the Commissioner which would be the
appropriate authority before whom a revision can be filed after the issuance
of Sanad Taksim. It is further jointly submitted that the provisions of
Section 16 of the Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 (in short "the Act")
governing revisional power of the Commissioner are similar to the
revisional power of the Financial Commissioner under Section 16 of the Act
prior to the amendment. It is further jointly stated that after passing of the
Sanad Taksim it was initially held by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this
Court that on account of the revenue authorities being functus officio, only
a writ petition would be maintainable. Subsequently, in various judgments it
was observed that the Financial Commissioner would have the power to
entertain a revision petition after the issuance of Sanad Taksim. As far as
the State of Haryana is concerned, an amendment was made in Section 16
of the Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 which was notified on 10.04.2017
by virtue of which the revisional jurisdiction was withdrawn from the
Financial Commissioner. Since the power of revision of the Financial
Commissioner was in similar terms with the power of the Commissioner,
therefore, once the revisional power has been withdrawn from the Financial
Commissioner, the said power has, even as per the stand of the State, to be
exercised by the Commissioner. The Collector in the said circumstances,
would not have the power to entertain a revision petition after the Sanad
Taksim has been issued. It is jointly prayed that the impugned order dated
15.09.2021 be set aside and the Commissioner, Gurugram Division be
directed to consider and decide the revision petition afresh on merits.
Learned counsel for the petitioners in both the writ petitions have submitted
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:055515
CWP-21348-2021(O&M) 4 2023:PHHC:055515
that in CWP-21348-2021, a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
14.10.2021 had granted interim order in favour of the petitioner to the effect
that dispossession of the petitioner shall remain stayed and pray that the
said interim order may be continued till 03.05.2023 and further prayer has
been made that the petitioners be granted liberty to seek extension of the
said stay order before the Commissioner.
4. The abovesaid course of action has not been opposed by
learned counsel for the respondents but they have submitted that the said
interim order should not be construed as an expression on the merits of the
case and continuation of the said interim order should be considered
independently by the Commissioner in accordance with law.
5. Keeping in view the above said facts and circumstances and the
consent between the counsel of the contesting parties, the present civil writ
petition i.e., CWP-21348-2021 is partly allowed and the order dated
15.09.2021 passed by the Commissioner (Anneuxre P-4) is set aside and the
case is remanded to the Commissioner for fresh decision on merits. The
parties through their counsel will appear before the Commissioner,
Gurugram Division, on 03.05.2023. The Commissioner, after issuance of
notice to all the parties concerned, would decide the revision petition, in
accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. The interim order dated
14.10.2021 would continue till 03.05.2023 and it would be open to the
petitioners to further pray for continuance of said interim order before the
Commissioner. The Commissioner would consider the said prayer as well
as the revision petition independently as this Court has not given any
opinion on the merits of the case. The grant of interim order till 03.05.2023
should not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in CWP-1849-
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:055515
CWP-21348-2021(O&M) 5 2023:PHHC:055515
2023 has submitted that the revision petition before the Commissioner was
not filed by the petitioner on account of the pendency of CWP-21348-2021
and has submitted that since it is within the purview of the power of the
Commissioner to entertain revision petition after issuance of Sanad Taksim,
thus, he be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to
file a revision petition before the Commissioner and the same may be also
decided along with the revision petition filed by the petitioner in CWP-
21348-2021.
7. Keeping in view the prayer made by learned counsel for the
petitioner in CWP-1849-2023, the petitioner therein is permitted to
withdraw the present writ petition i.e., CWP-1849-2023 with liberty to file a
revision petition before the Commissioner on or before 03.05.2023 and the
said matter be also decided along with the revision petition filed by the
petitioner in CWP-21348-2021.
8. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
disposed of in view of the above.
(VIKAS BAHL)
JUDGE
April 20, 2023
Davinder Kumar
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:055515
5 of 5
