IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.WP No. 5968 of 2006. [O&M] Date of Decision: 10th August, 2011. Mukhtiar Kaur Petitioner through Mr. P.K.Gupta, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & Ors. Respondents through Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL] The petitioner is aggrieved by the orders dated 04.08.1995, 31.05.1999, 03.08.1999 and 06.12.2005[Annexures P-6, P-11, P-13 and P-15] passed in the partition proceedings. Upon notice, the respondents have put in appearance and have filed their written statement. One of the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is that the private respondents had earlier also filed a petition for partition which was withdrawn by them by stating that the 'entire land' was not included. The private respondents in their second petition have not included the left out land which they did not mention in the first petition. It is also their contention that in the Mode of Partition, the Assistant Collector 1st Grade has allotted specific Khasra Numbers to the parties instead of setting out the Mode of Partition. It is contended that specific Khasra Numbers can not be allotted during the Mode of Partition. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and as agreed to by them, the impugned orders are modified to that extent and the matter is remitted to the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Jagraon to consider the above mentioned contentions and take necessary steps so that the Mode of Partition can be finalized and the parties are put into possession as per their shares. Disposed of. Dasti. August 10, 2011. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE