CWP No.16603 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.16603 of 2011 Date of decision: 06.09.2011 Baldev Singh and another ....Petitioners Versus The Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Civil Secretariat, Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. Harmanjit Singh Jugait, Advocate, for the petitioner. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) Present petition is arising out of the mutation proceedings. This Court in the case of Shamsher Singh Vs. Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala and others, CWP No.16338 of 2011 decided on 02/09/2011, having placed reliance on the judgment of Privy Council in the case of (Thakur) Nirman Singh and others versus Thakur Lal Rudra Partap Narain Singh and others, A.I.R.1926 Privy Council-100, judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sawarni Vs. Smt. Inder Kaur reported in 1996(7) JT 580 (SC), Balwant Singh and another Vs. Daulat Singh reported in 1997 (Supp.) Civil Court Cases 262 (SC), Suraj Bhan Vs. Financial Commissioner reported in 2007(6) SCC 186, Rajinder Singh Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir and others, 2008(9) SCC 368, and judgments of this Court in the case of Makhan Singh and another Vs. Achhar Singh and others reported in CWP No.16603 of 2011 -2- 2000(3) PLR 65, Dhian Singh Vs. Sheela Devi reported in 2008(1) RCR (Civil) 792, Sewa Singh and others Vs. Union of India and others, 2007(3) PLR 211, Harjit Kaur Vs. Kartar Kaur, 2007(3) PLR 572 and Jagtar Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 2007(4) PLR 638, has held as under: - “I have no hesitation to hold that mutation proceedings are summary proceedings in the nature of fiscal inquiries instituted in the interest of the State for the purpose of recovery of the land revenue and to update the revenue record. Any observation, finding or decision in the mutation proceeding shall not be res judicata and shall have no adverse effect in a regular suit involving question of title and possession. Learned Financial Commissioner in the case of Jabir Kaur (supra) was right in observing that revenue officer is not supposed to go into the indicate question of law, facts about the inheritance of the estate of the deceased. Judgment of the Financial Commissioner in the case of Jasbir Kaur (supra) stands approved in view of the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Harjit Kaur (supra). If civil suit, involving question of title is already pending, then sanctioning of the mutation should be kept in abeyance in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Jagtar Singh (supra). If mutation is uncontested one then revenue officer is duty bound to carry out the mutation at the earliest and should not keep it pending for long period. However, if mutation is contested and disputed by the parties claiming their respective titles, revenue officer should direct the parties to approach the civil Court to establish their respective titles and meanwhile revenue officer should not proceed with the mutation and should wait for the outcome of the decision in the civil suit. Revenue Officer is duty bound to carry out mutation and entries in the revenue record as per the ultimate decision in the civil suit between the parties. Writ petition arising out of summary proceedings of mutation should ordinarily be not entertained and parties should be left to get their respective title decided in a suit for declaration.” In view of the judgment passed in the case of Shamsher Singh (supra),I am not inclined to invoke my writ jurisdiction to see the CWP No.16603 of 2011 -3- correctness of the orders passed in the mutation proceedings. Petitioners may file regular suit for title. In the event of filing the civil suit same shall be decided in accordance with law at its own merit without being prejudiced from any finding/observation or decision in the mutation proceedings. With the above observations petition stands disposed of. (Alok Singh) Judge September 06, 2011 R.S.