CWP No.15662 of 2007 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.15662 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision:11.10.2010 Sadha Singh and others ..... Petitioners Versus State of Punjab through Collector/Additional Deputy Commissioner (D) District Fatehgarh Sahib and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA Present: Mr.Rakesh Chopra, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms.Anu Pal, AAG, Punjab for respondents no.1 and 2. Mr.P.K.Gupta, Advocate for respondent no.3. ***** RAJIVE BHALLA, J.(ORAL) The petitioners impugn an order dated 10.05.2007, whereby their application for additional evidence was rejected by the Collector/Additional Deputy Commissioner (D), District Fatehgarh Sahib. Counsel for the petitioners submits that after remand of the case the petitioners filed an application to lead additional evidence. The application was dismissed by holding that the evidence sought to be produced by additional evidence is already on record. It is argued that as documents referred to in paragraph 3 of the petition, have not been led in evidence, the finding recorded by the Collector is factually incorrect. Counsel for the Gram Panchayat submits that the application for additional evidence is malafide. The petitioners seek to delay the matter as the petitioners themselves have stated in their application for additional evidence that these documents have been exhibited. In response to the latter argument, counsel for the petitioners CWP No.15662 of 2007 (O&M) -2- submits that reference to exhibit numbers in the application is an inadvertent error. I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. The petitioners application for additional evidence has been rejected without due application of mind. The impugned order does not make any reference as to when and how these documents were exhibited. Reference to these documents by exhibit numbers, is an inadvertent error on the part of counsel and is therefore insufficient to dismiss the application. The documents sought to be led into evidence have a significant bearing upon the controversy in hand. In view of what has been stated hereinabove, the writ petition is allowed, the order 10.05.2007 is set aside and the application for additional evidence is allowed. The Collector/Additional Deputy Commissioner, Fatehgarh Sahib shall grant an opportunity, to the petitioners to lead additional evidence, and while doing so shall ensure that only such documents are allowed to be led into evidence as have not been exhibited or proved in accordance with law. Costs assessed at Rs.5,000/- shall be paid by the petitioners. 11.10.2010 [ RAJIVE BHALLA ] shamsher JUDGE