IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.13353 of 2011 Date of Decision: July 28, 2011 Bhajan Kaur and others …..Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: Mr.G.S.Verma, Advocate for the petitioners. 1. Whether Reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Petitioners have invoked extra ordinary/supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India challenging various orders passed by the Revenue Authorities in a mutation proceedings. It is the settled position of law that mutation proceedings are of summary nature and any order passed therein shall not be res judicata in a regular suit for declaration of title/ possession. Civil Court shall be at liberty to decide the question of title/ possession in a pending suit on the basis of evidence produced before it and shall not prejudice from any finding/observation decision of the revenue authorities in a mutation proceedings; even if mutation is carried out in favour of one of the parties, it shall not affect the rights of the petitioners, since mutation does not confer any title and it is the source of title which is to be seen. In view of the above, I am not inclined to exercise my writ jurisdiction interfering with the observations of the revenue authorities in a mutation proceedings. Since parties are before the Civil Court as per the learned counsel for the petitioners, in a suit involving question of title/ possession, therefore, parties can agitate their respective rights in the pending civil suit. The Revenue Authorities shall carry out mutation strictly as per the ultimate decision/judgment passed in the said civil suit . This petition is disposed of accordingly. (Alok Singh) July 28, 2011 Judge BB