IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 10091/2011-J Decided on:24.11.2011 _____________________________________________ Gulzari Lal. …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another. …Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Pawan Gautam, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Ankush Sood, Addl. A.G. with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. A.G. _____________________________________________________ Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Material facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that respondent No.2 filed two separate applications in respect of Khewat Nos. 1056 and 1057 of village Arniala for partition. The applications were clubbed together. The Assistant Collector 1st Grade confirmed the partition on 20.2.2009. Petitioner preferred an appeal before the Collector, Sub Divisional, Una against the order dated 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 20.2.2009. The appeal was dismissed on 10.8.2009. Thereafter, petitioner preferred revision petition No.385/2009 before the Divisional Commissioner, Kangra. He dismissed the same on 19.3.2011. Petitioner thereafter filed revision petition before the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Himachal Pradesh. She also dismissed the same on 6.9.2011. 2. Mr. Pawan Guatam has strenuously argued that the Abadi Deh could not be partitioned by the Assistant Collect 1st Grade. 3. Petitioner was present before the Assistant Collector 1st Grade on 17.5.2008 at the time of framing of partition. He has raised no objection. Thereafter, the mode of partition was prepared. It is only thereafter that the partition was confirmed by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade on 20.2.2009 on the spot. The parties were present on the spot. They have again not raised any objection qua Abadi Deh. It is for the first time that the petitioner has raised objection in an appeal preferred by him against the order dated 20.2.2009 passed by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade. In fact, the petitioner himself has sold shares in both the Khatas to respondent No.2 and consented for the partition as per recorded 3 shares. The authorities below have correctly appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence. The orders passed by the authorities below are in conformity with law. There is neither any irregularity nor any illegality in the orders passed. 4. Consequently, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, there is no merit in the present petition and the same is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. 24.11.2011 *awasthi*