CWP No. 18566 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 18566 of 2009 Date of Decision: 4.12.2009 Jagir Singh and others ....Petitioners. Versus The Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Punjab and others ...Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. Sushil Saini, Advocate for the petitioners. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. The petitioners have approached this Court by way of instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India impugning the orders dated 11.10.2005 and 27.5.2009 (Annexures P-8 and P-10) passed by respondent No.1, allowing the revision petition filed by respondent No.2 and predecessor-in-interest of respondents No.3 and 4 while hearing the partition proceedings. The Financial Commissioner vide order dated 11.10.2005 (Annexure P-8) while adjudicating the matter in favour of the respondents had recorded as under:- “After considering the written arguments of both the parties and perusal of the orders of the lower courts, I am inclined to agree with the arguments of the petitioner but the respondents are bent upon delaying CWP No. 18566 of 2009 -2- the case unnecessarily. Even the revision before the Commissioner had been filed after two years of the Collector's order. It is strange that respondents who had no passage to their house took two years to file revision before the Commissioner. I have seen the orders of the Collector and ACIG and they have very judiciously decided the partition case amongst 50 co- sharers while taking care of their objections. Finding merits in the revision, I accept the same and uphold the orders of the ACIG and the Collector and set aside the order of the Commissioner.” On review application having been filed by the petitioners, the same was rejected by respondent No.1 vide order dated 27.5.2009 (Annexure P-10) with the following observations:- “5. I have gone through the written arguments of both the counsels and perused the record of the case minutely. A.C. Ist Grade has rightly partitioned the land which attained finality. Further Collector upheld the same. The Commissioner accepted the revision of the respondent without going through the facts. No new evidence or fact has been brought on record which may warrant interference in the order of the then F.C. Appeals-II. My predecessor has rightly set aside the impugned order upheld the order of A.C. Ist Grade and that of the Collector. The applicant/ respondent are unnecessarily indulging in delay CWP No. 18566 of 2009 -3- tactics to avoid, the proceedings and for enjoying more fruits of the land in excess in their possession. I find no merit in the grounds of the review application the same is rejected being devoid of merits.” Furthermore, on a specific query being put to the learned counsel for the petitioners to show that the petitioners are not in possession of the shares in excess to the one to which they are entitled to, the learned counsel could not give any reply much less satisfactory and also could not refer to any material to dispute the findings recorded by the Financial Commissioner. No illegality or perversity could be shown in the orders impugned herein which may warrant interference by this Court especially in view of the findings recorded by the Financial Commissioner to the effect that the revision against the order by the Collector was filed after a period of two years and, thus, the petitioners were delaying the proceedings as they were in possession of the land in excess of their shares. In view of the above and after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court is satisfied that there is no merit in the instant writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed. December 4, 2009 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE