CWP No.12787 of 2011 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. CWP No.12787 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 21.07.2011 Angrej Singh ....Petitioner Versus The Collector, Kurukshetra and others ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh 1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgement ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. R.K. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Pattar, Sr. DAG, Haryana for the State. ... Alok Singh, J.(Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that application under Section 10-A of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulations) Act, 1961, as applicable in Haryana, was moved by the petitioner before the Assistant Collector, First Grade, which was allowed by the officer designated as S.D.M. and Assistant Collector, First Grade, however, in the order instead of “Assistant Collector, First Grade”, words “Sub Divisional Magistrate” were mentioned. He has further stated that mentioning of Sub Divisional Magistrate in an order, which ought to have been passed by the same officer as Assistant Collector, First Grade would CWP No.12787 of 2011 2 be only a typographical mistake. However, the Collector has set aside the order only on the ground that it was passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate and not by the Assistant Collector, First Grade, Notice of motion. Mr. S.S. Pattar, Sr. Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, has accepted notice on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2. No notice is required to be issued to the private respondents at this stage. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, present petition is being disposed of. The Collector has set aside the order cancelling lease only on the ground that the order was passed by the SDM and not by the Assistant Collector, First Grade. Learned State counsel has fairly stated that the order was passed by the officer, who exercises the power of the SDM and Assistant Collector, Fist Grade. He has rightly stated that even if the impugned order is set aside, there is no bar to decide the application afresh by the Assistant Collector, First Grade. In view of the statement made by the learned State counsel, present petition is allowed. Respondent No.2 – the Assistant Collector, First Grade shall decide the application moved by the petitioner under Section 10-A the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulations) Act, 1961, afresh in accordance with law after hearing both the parties on its own merit, within sixty days from the date certified copy of this order is produced before him. ( Alok Singh ) Judge 21.07.2011 sk.