CWP No.12647 of 2010.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.12647 of 2010 Date of Decision: 20.07.2010 **** Jagdish Ram . . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab and others . . . . . Respondents **** 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? **** Present: Mr. R.S. Modi, Advocate for the petitioners ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 27.01.2010 (Annexure P6) passed by the Financial Commissioner, Animal Husbandry, Punjab, Chandigarh, whereby, the order dated 24.02.2009 (Annexure P4) passed by the Collector, Barnala has been set aside on the ground that the same was passed without hearing respondent No.4 to 6 who have been admittedly affected by that order. CWP No.12647 of 2010.doc - 2 – (2). Suffice to it mention here that the petitioner moved an application after 11 years for review/correction of the mutation in relation to some immoveable/moveable properties allegedly exchanged between him and the private respondents. (3). The petitioner’s application was accepted even without notice to the private respondents. That order has been set aside by the learned Financial Commissioner and the matter has been remanded to the Collector, Barnala for deciding afresh after hearing both the parties. (4). In my considered view, no interference with the impugned order dated 27.01.2010 (Annexure P6) is called for except to issue a direction to the learned Collector, Barnala, to decide the matter afresh as early as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (5). Ordered accordingly. (6). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 20.07.2010 vishal shonkar