IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.WP No. 13750 of 2011. [O&M] Date of Decision: 2nd August, 2011. Maghar Singh Petitioner through Mr. Ajay Pal Singh, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & Ors. Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 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 petitioner is aggrieved by the orders dated 12.02.2009, 27.07.2010 and 08.03.2011 [Annexures P-3, P-5 and P- 7] passed by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Sunam, Collector, Sunam and the Divisional Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala respectively under the Punjab Land Revenue Act. The impugned orders have been passed in partition proceedings initiated by the private respondents. The petitioner had purchased 1/4th share of 120th share of Arjan Singh in a court auction held on 14.11.1990. Pursuant to the sale certificate, a mutation was duly entered in favour of the petitioner and his name was entered in the Jamabandi for the year 1985-86. The name of the petitioner, however, was not reflected in the subsequent Jamabandis and as a result thereto, he was not impleaded as a party – respondent in the partition proceedings. It also appears that only partial partition has taken place and the entire joint holding has not been partitioned so far. If that is so, notwithstanding the impugned orders, the petitioner shall be at liberty to apply and seek partition of the left out joint holding and allocation of share to him on the basis of the sale certificate issued in his favour by the Civil Court. Disposed of. Dasti. August 02, 2011. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE