83 A 9P le Civil Writ Petition N012542 of 1989e IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB S HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH eae Date of Decision2 April 27 2011 Civil Writ Petition N0012542 of 1989 m 3a1a1 Petitioner 0 0 VERSUS I 9 The Additional Director Consolidation of Holdings Punjab Chandigarhand others Respondents I Z CORAM HONBLE MROUSTICE MOHINDER PAL C le Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment7 2 To be referred to the Reportets or not7 3e Whether the judgmentshould be reportedin the Digest 7 Z Presentl Mr RKS BrarAdvocate 00 for the petitioner 7 Ms AmbikaLuthra Assistant Advocate GeneralPunjab Z Mre BeSMann Advocate Ll for the private respondents MOHINDER PAL 3e The prayer made in this petition filed under Articles of the Constitution of India is for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari therebyquashing the order dated 231988 Annexure Pv3 passed by the the Additional Director of HoldingsPunjabChandigarhwherebypetitionunder Section42 of the East PunjabHoldings Consolidation and Prevention SURESH KUMAR 2015.04.04 13: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 84 ed e2m Civil Writ Petition N012542 of 19890 of Act 1948 lereinafter referred to as the Act by the for repartitionof the Iand in disputehas been dismissede I have heardMr RKeS BrarAdvocate appearingfor the Ms Ambika Luthra Assistant Advocate GeneralPunjab and Mre BMann Advocate appearingfor the private respondents and havegone throughthe records of the case C The is resident of villageChak Bhora Before the 0 start of consolidation in the village the State governmentput the Iand 0 I Ill viliage to auction which was restricted for the members of the C Castes and ScheduledTribes etc The petitionerbeing a I IandlessScheduled Caste tookpart in the auction and he was declared Z the bidder for Khasra No3 min measuring90 kanals The sald hasra number was auctioned for Rs 120001The auction took place I on 28011976 andthereafter the petitionerdepositedthe requlred L amount On 1806 1976 the petitionerwas put in possessionof the Z Iand in After gettingthe possessionof the said Iand the QO started cultivating the same However since the sale 7 Z certificate hadnot been issued to the petitioner in the revenue record hewas shown as Gair Maroosi Tenant under the Central Government andentries to this effect were also incorporatedin the Jamabandi for the year 198081 So far as under the Act are concerned are made the basis for the consolidation in the villageand the authorities are requiredto allot the Iand to all the rightwholders as pertheir entitlement as shown in the Jamabandi The authorities are requiredto maintain the same position whichexisted before the consolidation proceedingsstarted SURESH KUMAR 2015.04.04 13: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 85 3 CivilWrit Petition N012542 of 1989 In this context theprovisionsof Section 25 of the Act need noce The same are below for facility of referencel 25 Rights of Iandowners and tenants after consolidation same as before A Iandowner or tenant shall 1 r subjectto provisionsof SecOon 16 and 0 16A havethe same rightin the Iand allotted to 0 him in of the scheme of I C5 consolidationas he has in his originalholding I astenancy as the case may be Il Z C In view of the provisionsof Section 25 of the Act quoted I above the had a rightto be recorded in the revenue record C1 such as he was recorded before consolidation in the village as Z Howeverthe consolidation authorities without appreciatingthe CQ of Section 25 of the Act committed a grave mistake while 7 Z notcarrying out the old entries after consolidation in the revenue recordeThough the petitionerwas the highestbidder and the Iand was sold to him in the restricted auction and he was in possessionof Khasra no3 min measuring90 kanals but not even a singleinch of Iandwas allotted to the petitionerin Iieu of this Khasra number When afterthe conclusion of the consolidation proceedingsin the year 1987 the possessionswere transferredand the rightholders were settled at their respectiveTaks the petitionercame to know about this glaring mistakeIt was under these circumstances that the petitionerfiled a under Section 42 of the Act before the Additional Director SURESH KUMAR 2015.04.04 13: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 86 P 4 6 1 CivilWrit Petition Noe12542 of 1989 Consolidationof Holdings Chandigarh respondentN0 11 for of the Iand in dispute which was dismissed by No l vide order dated 2381988 nnexure Pm3 Keeping in view theprovisionsof Section 25 of the Act and the fact that the had pu rchased khasra No m in 90 Kanals in auction by payingRs 120001 from the m Government andpossessionof the same had been given to him on 0 Kanungo Revenue Departmentand that he 181976 0 I shownin possessionof the Iand as per Jamabandi for the year was C5 1980e81 No l ought to have allowed the appllcatlon I ofthe filed under Section 42 of the Act Z For thereasons stated above this petitionsucceeds The allowed and the order dated 2381988 same IS I Annexure Pm3 passed by the the Additional Director Consolidation 1 t3 Chandigarh espondent NolJ is set aslde Z of HoldingSl No l shall now decide the applicationof the The m petitioner filedby him under Section 42 of the Act keeping in e Z view the made above and the provisionsof Sectlon Om 25 of the Act No l shall decide the matter and preferablywithin a periodof two months after the petitioner before respondent Nol a copy ofthis judgmentas the matter pertains to the year 19890 C PALI OUDGE April 27 2011 ak 1 SURESH KUMAR 2015.04.04 13: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document