CWP No.13162 of 2009 : 1 : In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision: 14.12.2009 Gurdwara Sahib Patshahi Dasvin, Managing Committee Pakha Kalan, Tehsil Talwandi Sabo, District Bathinda through its President. ... Petitioner Versus Financial Commissioner (Appeals-I), Punjab and others. ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present: Mr.GC Bajaj, Advocate,for the petitioner. PERMOD KOHLI, J. (Oral): Respondent No.5 filed an application for correction of the Khasra Girdawari for the land measuring 112 Kanals 11 Marlas, situated in village Amarpura @ Gurthari, Tehsil Talwandi Sabo, District Bathinda, for the crops Sauni 2003 till the date of the filing of the application, before the Assistant Collect IInd Grade (Naib Tehsildar), Talwandi Sabo. After summoning the petitioner in the aforesaid matter, respondent No.4, fixed the case for spot inspection on 07.03.2005. It is alleged that without informing the petitioner, he inspected the site and ordered the correction of the Khasra Girdawari in CWP No.13162 of 2009 : 2 : favour of respondent No.5 vide order dated 08.03.2005. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the aforesaid order before respondent No.3, who dismissed the same vide order dated 25.10.2005. Dis-satisfied with the order of the Appellate Authority, the same was challenged before Respondent No.2 in revision. Respondent No.2 has accepted the revision petition and remanded the case back to respondent No.4 for afresh decision vide order dated 27.12.2006. On remand, the Assistant Collector IInd Grade-respondent No.4, after summoning the parties, dismissed the application of respondent No.5 vide order dated 25.05.2007, on the ground that he has no jurisdiction to decide the application. The said order was challenged by respondent No.5 before respondent No.3 in appeal. The said appeal was accepted vide order dated 04.07.2007 (Annexure P-3) and the case was remanded back to respondent No.4 for afresh decision. The petitioner challenged the order of respondent No.3 before respondent No.2 in revision, the same has also been dismissed vide order dated 17.09.2008 (Annexure P-4). The petitioner thereafter filed a revision petition before respondent No.1,who has dismissed the same vide the impugned order dated 21.07.2009 (Annexure P-5). Learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the aforesaid orders on two counts: (i) that the entries in the khasra girdawaris were incorporated in the jamabandi for the CWP No.13162 of 2009 : 3 : years 2002-2003 and once the entries are recorded in the jamabandi, the Assistant Collector has no jurisdiction to entertain the application for correction and the remedy is before the Civil Court. For this purpose, he has relied upon a judgment of this Court in the case of Smt. Udham Kaur Vs. Financial Commissioner, Punjab and others, 1983 P.L.J., 58; (ii) that the remedy is by way of a suit under Section 45 of the Land Revenue Act. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length. I have perused the impugned orders Annexures P-3, P-4 and P-5. The Appellate Authority has set aside the order of the Assistant Collector IInd Grade on the ground that at the time of preparation of Khasra girdawaris, entries can be changed by the revenue officer after spot inspection and verifying the possession which procedure has not been adopted. It has further been held that no opportunity was afforded to the parties before passing the order. The Commissioner who heard the appeal against the order of the Collector also concurred with the order of the Collector and, primarily, dismissed the appeal on the ground that the matter has been remanded to the Assistant Collector IInd Grade for afresh decision. The Revisional CWP No.13162 of 2009 : 4 : Authority has also endorsed the view of the Appellate Authority. The question whether the entries in Jamabandi for the years 2002-2003 were recorded with due notice to the concerned and after spot inspection, has to be considered by the concerned authorities. Vide the impugned orders, rights of the parties have not been decided in any manner. Case has been remanded back to the Assistant Collector IInd Grade for de novo enquiry to pass afresh order. For the reasons recorded above, I find no merit in the present writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed. It is, however, observed that the Assistant Collector IInd Grade will take into consideration the plea of the petitioner regarding the entries made in the jamabandi for the years 2002-2003. He will also verify as to whether these entries were made in the jamabandi by adopting due process of law. 14.12.2009 (PERMOD KOHLI) BLS JUDGE Note: Whether to be referred to the Reporter? NO