Civil Writ Petition No.17890 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.17890 of 2010 Date of decision:- August 4, 2011 Jagbir Singh .....Petitioner VERSUS Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Haryana & others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH PRESENT: Mr. Madan Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana for the State. Mr. G.S. Sandhawalia, Advocate, for respondent No.5. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 29.8.2008 (Annexure P-2). This order has been passed by respondent No.2, vide which the appeal filed by respondent No.5 against the order dated 5.12.2007 passed by respondent No.4, was allowed. The petitioner is also impugning orders dated 26.8.2009 (Annexure P-3) and dated 23.2.2010 (Annexure P-4), vide which the appeal/revision petition of the petitioner was dismissed. In fact, respondent No.4 had allowed the application filed by the petitioner under Section 31 of the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1987 (for short 'the Act') permitting him to deposit the amount in the Government Treasury, which was interfered with by respondent No.5 primarily on the ground that the petitioner should approach the Wakf Tribunal. Counsel for the petitioner contends that in the Civil Writ Petition No.17890 of 2010 -2- absence of dispute relating to a 'Wakf', the Wakf Tribunal would have no jurisdiction to decide the disputes between the Wakf Board and its tenants. Counsel, accordingly, contends that the petitioner will be fully eligible and entitled to approach the Tehsildar under Section 31 of the Act for depositing the rent. Notice of motion was issued and the reply has been filed. The facts and the legal position as noticed are not in serious dispute. The petitioner seems to have a right to deposit the rent under Section 31 of the Act. There is no matter, which is required to be agitated before the Wakf Tribunal. Accordingly, the impugned orders (Annexures P-2 to P-4) cannot be sustained and are, accordingly, set aside. The order passed by the Assistant Collector-respondent No.4 is upheld. The petitioner may, accordingly, take action to deposit the rent in terms of the order so passed. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. August 04, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH) monika JUDGE