CWP No.334 of 1988 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Date of Decision:- 4.5.2010 Balbir Singh son of Gajjan Singh ...Petitioner Versus The Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.M.L.Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Ajaib Singh, Addl. AG Punjab for respondent No.1. Nemo for respondent No.2. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J. Concisely, the facts, relevant for disposal of present writ petition, are that in the consolidation proceedings conducted under the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (for short “the Act”), the joint khata of Gajjan Singh, father of the petitioner and Arjan Singh, father of respondent No.2, who were real brothers, was partitioned and separate parcels of land (Taks) were allotted to them. The Consolidation Officer passed an order dated 9.9.1971 in this relevant connection. 2. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner filed the appeal before the Settlement Officer (Consolidation), invoking the provisions of section 21(1) of the Act. The parties had entered into a compromise and made their respective statements to that effect. In view of the agreement, the Appellate Authority effected the changes in their respective parcels of lands and accordingly, accepted the appeal on the basis of compromise between the parties, vide impugned order dated 1.6.1972 (Annexure P2). 3. Although the Appellate Authority accepted the appeal of the petitioner on the basis of compromise, but still, he (petitioner) filed a petition under sections 42 and 43-A of the Act, which was dismissed by the Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab, being time barred, vide impugned order dated 8.9.1987 (Annexure P3). 4. The petitioner still did not feel satisfied with the impugned orders (Annexures P2 and P3) and filed the present writ petition. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, having gone through the record with their valuable assistance and after considering the matter deeply, to my CWP No.334 of 1988 2 mind, as there is no merit, therefore, the present writ petition deserves to be dismissed, for the reasons mentioned here-in-below. 6. As is evident from the record that during the course of consolidation proceedings, the joint khata of Gajjan Singh, father of the petitioner and Arjan Singh, father of respondent No.2, was partitioned and the respective separate parcels of land (Taks) were allotted to them by the Consolidation Officer about 39 years ago. It is not a matter of dispute that in the wake of appeal of the petitioner, the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) effected the changes on the basis of compromise between the parties, vide impugned order (Annexure P2). 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner miserably remained unsuccessful in assailing the impugned order (Annexure P2) in any manner and to point out, how and in what manner, the same (based on the compromise between the parties) is bad in law and illegal, so as to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. On the contrary, the contention of the learned State counsel that the consolidation proceedings completed 39 years ago cannot be disturbed in the absence of any ground/cogent material on record in this regard, has considerable force. 8. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, as there is not merit, therefore, the present writ petition is dismissed, in the obtaining circumstances of the case. (Mehinder Singh Sullar) Judge 4.5.2010 AS