CWP No.9702 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.9702 of 2007 Date of Decision: 28.10.2010 Kaka Singh .....Petitioner Vs. The Commissioner (Appeals),Punjab, Chandigarh and others ....Respondents .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA **** Present : Brig. B.S. Tounque, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. C.S. Brar, DAG, Punjab, for respondents no.1 to 4. Mr. Sherry K. Singla, Advocate for respondent no.5,6 and 14 to 16. .... RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral) The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 9.2.2006, passed by the Financial Commissioner (Appeals),Punjab, Chandigarh. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the question of title raised on the basis of the Will dated 19.9.2003, duly executed by Lal Singh, has neither been considered nor decided by revenue officers. It is further argued that the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade had no jurisdiction to club different khewats as co-sharers are different. It is further submitted that as the petitioner's appeal was dismissed by the Collector for failure to file process fee, the Financial Commissioner had no jurisdiction to deal with the CWP No.9702 of 2007 2 matter on merits, while rejecting the revision filed by the petitioner. It is also argued that the family partition has been ignored. Counsel for the private respondents, on the other hand, submits that the Will has neither been produced nor proved before any court or any revenue officer. It is further submitted that as the vendees have become co- sharers, the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade, rightly directed clubbing of all the khewats. I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. As is apparent from the order passed by the Assistant Collector, the Collector, the Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner, the Will sought to be propounded by the petitioner has not been produced before any revenue officer, thereby obviating the necessity of revenue officer recording any opinion thereon in accordance with Section 117 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887. The plea of a family partition must also fail, as the alleged family partition was not reported to revenue officers, in accordance with Section 123 of the Act. The plea that different khewats cannot be clubbed in a single application, is without merit, as the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade has ordered preparation of separate mode of partition for the khewats and has only clubbed the land of Khewat Nos.83 and 84, as they are too small to warrant separate partition proceedings. In the absence of any error of jurisdiction or of law, the writ petition is dismissed. 28.10.2010 (RAJIVE BHALLA) GS JUDGE