CWP No.19465 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Date of Decision: 28.10.2010 CWP No.19465 of 2007 Piara Singh .....Petitioner Vs. The Financial Commissioner, Punjab and others ....Respondents CWP No.19498 of 2007 Kartar Singh .....Petitioner Vs. The Financial Commissioner, Punjab and others ....Respondents CWP No.224 of 2008 Gian Singh .....Petitioner Vs. The Financial Commissioner, Punjab and others ....Respondents .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA **** Present : Mr. Karan Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. C.S. Brar, DAG, Punjab for respondents no.1 to 3. Mr.D.S. Sandhu, Advocate for respondent no.4. .... RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral) This order shall dispose of CWP Nos.19465, 19498 of 2007 and CWP No.224 of 2008. The facts have been taken from CWP No.19465 of 2007. The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of CWP No.19465 of 2007 2 Certiorari for quashing orders dated 9.4.2002 and 28.5.2007, passed by the Financial Commissioner,Revenue, Punjab. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the revision filed before the Financial Commissioner was dismissed in default on 23.5.1997. The petitioner filed Misc.No.77 of 2000 for recalling of this order. The application was allowed on 21.11.2000 and the petition was restored, subject to payment of ` 1,000/- as costs. The costs were deposited on 7.12.2000, after extension of time was granted on 5.12.2000. The Financial Commissioner, thereafter, heard arguments on merits, but inadvertently dismissed Misc.No.77 of 2000, instead of recording an order on merits and held that there was no ground to restore the petition. The petitioner filed an application for review, which was dismissed on 28.5.2007. Counsel for the private respondent submits that the petitioner merely seeks to delay matter, as he is in possession. The petitioner at no stage of proceedings before the Financial Commissioner pointed out that the original petition had been restored. I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the impugned orders. A perusal of the original record, that has been requisitioned, reveals that MR No.25 was dismissed in default on 23.5.1997, but was restored on 21.11.2000, subject to payment of ` 1,000/- as costs. The order dated 21.11.2000 reads as follows :- “ Heard. Keeping in view the fact that the application for restoration was made after nearly 2-1/2 years, the petition is restored subject to payment of Rs.1000 within 2 weeks. To come up on 5.12.2000 for CWP No.19465 of 2007 3 consideration.” On 5.12.2000, a week's time was granted for deposit of costs. The petitioner deposited the costs on 7.12.2000. The revision, therefore, stood restored to its original number and stage. The revision came up for consideration before the Financial Commissioner on various dates. On 9.4.2002 arguments were heard and orders were reserved. It, however, appears that the Financial Commissioner, instead of pronouncing orders on merits, inadvertently, rejected the application for restoration, oblivious of the fact that the application had already been allowed in favour of the petitioner on 21.11.2000. The palpable error committed by the Financial Commissioner should have been rectified when the petitioner filed a review petition. It appears that the order restoring the revision was not brought to the notice of the Financial Commissioner. In this view of the matter, the writ petitions are allowed and orders dated 9.4.2002 and 28.5.2007 are set aside and the matter is remitted to the Financial Commissioner, Revenue Punjab, Chandigarh, to decide the revision afresh and in accordance with law, within two months from receipt of a certified copy of this order. Parties are directed to appear before the Financial Commissioner, Revenue, Punjab, Chandigarh on 2.12.2010. 28.10.2010 (RAJIVE BHALLA) GS JUDGE