CWP No. 18984 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 18984 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION: May 16, 2011 Parsann Singh and another .........PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab and others ......RESPONDENT(S) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA Present: Mr. Varun Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. G.S. Attariwala, Addl. A.G., Punjab. Mr. P.C. Rakra, Advocate, for respondent no. 5. AJAI LAMBA, J. (ORAL) 1. Vide impugned order Annexure P-4 dated 20.11.2007, the petition filed by the petitioners under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (for short 'The Act') has been dismissed on the ground that the same had been filed after a delay of 35 days. It has been said in the impugned order Annexure P-4 that no meritable consideration with justifiable reasoning has come on record. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of the Court towards application for condonation of delay filed before Financial Commissioner, placed on record as Annexure P-5. Learned counsel contends that delay was for bona fide reasons, neither intentional nor deliberate. 3. Learned counsel for the private respondents contends that the CWP No. 18984 of 2008 2 order of Commissioner, against which a revision had been filed before the Financial Commissioner, does not adversely effect the rights of the petitioners in so much as the Commissioner has upheld the order passed by the Collector vide which the case has been remanded for determination by Assistant Collector IInd Grade, Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur. 4. I have considered the contention of the learned counsel. 5. As per Section 16 of the Act, the Financial Commissioner can at any time, call for the record of any case pending before or disposed of by any revenue officer subordinate to him. The power given to the Financial Commissioner under Section 16 of the Act is suo motu also. 6. In such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that hyper- technical ground should not have been taken to deny hearing to the petitioners in their petition under Section 16 of the Act particularly because delay is of 35 days. The grounds taken in the application Annexure P-5 for condonation of delay appear to be genuine, reasonable and valid. 7. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, impugned order Annexure P-4 dated 20.11.2007 is hereby quashed. The parties are directed to appear before the Financial Commissioner Appeals- II, Punjab, Chandigarh on 07.07.2011. The Financial Commissioner would hear the parties on merits and pass orders as permissible in law. 8. Petition stands disposed of. 16.05.2011 (AJAI LAMBA) shivani JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?