IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 13993 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 04.08.2011 Mukhtiar Singh ..Petitioner Versus Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: Mr. Sherry K. Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Kumar Garg, Advocate, for the caveator – respondent Nos. 4 to 7. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ALOK SINGH J. (ORAL) Mr. Anil Kumar Garg, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Nos.4 to 7 – caveators. On being asked, Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab has accepted notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3. Respondent No. 8 seems to be proforma respondent, hence, need not be served. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the present petition is disposed of today itself, at the admission stage. 3. The only grievance raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that learned Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Payal, respondent No.3 has not discussed the objections filed by the petitioner against the Naksha Bey and Naksha Zeem; learned Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Payal, was duty bound to decide the objections after hearing the parties; and the impugned order dated 12.10.2009 (Annexure P/2) is non-speaking. CWP No. 13993 of 2011 -2- .. 4. I have gone through the order (Annexure P/2), wherein, learned Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Payal, has observed as under:- “Naksha Bey and Naksha Zeem was got prepared as per the mode of partition on which Mukhtiar Singh submitted his objections and after hearing the objections, the same are dismissed and Naksha Zeem was approved.” 5. On the face of it, the order seems to be non-speaking one. Every Judicial Officer or officer discharging quasi-judicial jurisdiction is expected to pass speaking and detailed orders after discussing arguments and objections raised by the respective parties. In the present case, learned Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Payal, failed to discuss the objections raised by petitioner - Mukhtiar Singh, and has not assigned any reason as to why the objections were being rejected. 6. In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Impugned order ( Annexure P/2) is set-aside. Parties are directed to appear before the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Payal on 30.08.2011. Learned Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Payal, (respondent No. 3), shall complete the proceedings, in accordance with law, within 60 days thereafter. He shall pass fresh order after hearing the parties and considering their respective objections/arguments. 7. Certified copy of this order shall be placed before Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Payal by the petitioner, within seven days from today. Learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab shall also forward a copy of this order to learned Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Payal, (respondent No. 3), forthwith, for strict compliance. (ALOK SINGH) JUDGE 04.08.2011 som