C.W.P No. 531 of 1987 (O&M) ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P No. 531 of 1987 (O&M) Date of decision : August 12, 2010 Pal Singh and others, ...... Petitioner (s) v. The Director of Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab and others, ...... Respondent(s) *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. H.R.Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S.Gill, DAG Punjab for respondent No.1. Mr. Amarjit Markan, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 5. *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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 ? *** AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral) This writ petition has been filed against the order dated 24.3.1986 (Annexure P-4) whereby ex-parte order was passed against the petitioners, and the order dated 3.11.1986 (Annexure P-7) whereby an application, under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, for setting aside the exparte order (Annexure P-4) was rejected. C.W.P No. 531 of 1987 (O&M) ::2:: The Director Consolidation mentioned that apart from the question of ex-parte proceedings, even on merits he was not inclined to vary his earlier order. Counsel for the petitioners has argued that even when the original order was passed, no evidence was considered but only certain resolutions were considered and that had the petitioners been present, they would have definitely been able to lead evidence in support of their case. Counsel for respondents No.2 to 5 states that the original order was passed on the basis of consolidation record. In my opinion, mere mention in the order that the case has been heard on merits would not satisfy the interest of justice. Even otherwise, I find that this writ petition has now been pending for the past almost quarter century and on the very first date of hearing, the operation of the impugned orders was stayed. Keeping in mind the totality of circumstances, it would be appropriate if respondent No.1 decides the matter afresh on merits. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed, the impugned orders (Annexures P-4 and P-7) are set aside, and the matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for a fresh decision on merits. Till the matter is decided, status quo with regard to the property in dispute shall be maintained by the parties. As the main petition has since been allowed, all the pending civil miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) August 12, 2010. JUDGE `kk'