CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.15410 OF 2007 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: SEPTEMBER 23, 2011 Baldev Singh and another .....Petitioners VERSUS Financial Commissioner (Cooperation), Government of Punjab, Chandigarh and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. J. P. Rana, Advocate for Mr. Harsh Bunger, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. A. S. Jattana, Addl.A.G., Punjab, for the State. Mr. Malkeet Singh, Advocate, for respondent Nos.6,16,17, 19 and 20. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The writ petitioners are aggrieved against the order dated 6.4.2004 passed by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Phillaur and order dated 11.1.2005 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate-cum- Collector and also also against the order dated 6.7.2006 passed by the Commissioner. Their further grievance is against the order dated 27.4.2007 passed by the Financial Commissioner. Respondent No.20 and his brother filed three separate CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.15410 OF 2007 :{ 2 }: applications for partition of joint land comprised in three different Khewats. These applications were consolidated and a common mode of partition was proposed and sanctioned on 15.4.1998. After sanction of the mode of partition, papers were called from the field staff and objections were invited. The Assistant Collector Ist Grade made certain modifications on 28.4.1999 in the partition papers. The final partition was ordered on 25.2.2000. This order was challenged in an appeal, which was dismissed on 28.11.2000. Thereafter, the revision was filed before the Commissioner, who accepted the same on 16.7.2003 and remanded the matter to Assistant Collector Ist Grade to conduct the partition proceedings from the stage of calling objections against Naksha Airra. The parties were directed to appear before the Assistant Collector Ist Grade. Upon remand, the parties appeared before the Assistant Collector. Despite adjourning the case on number of occasions, none of the party filed any objection. Accordingly, the Assistant Collector upheld the earlier order passed. The same order has further been upheld in appeal and revision. The petitioners accordingly have filed the present writ petition for impugning the orders as noticed above. The grievance of the petitioners is that the same order, as was earlier set-aside, has been maintained, which would mean that it is a case of non-application of mind. I am not impressed with this line of submission. The reason for Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Phillaur, to uphold the earlier order was that none of the party before him had filed any objection to the Naksha Airra despite having been provided with number of opportunities. Thereafter, the matter was heard and after CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.15410 OF 2007 :{ 3 }: perusing the statements of the parties, the earlier order of partition dated 25.2.2000 was confirmed on 6.4.2004. There is no reason or cause made out for interfering in the impugned orders. The Assistant Collector has rightly upheld the earlier order as there was no objection raised before him by either of the party. The view taken by the Assistant Collector, thus, can not be faulted in any manner. There is no merit in the writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. September 23, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE