Civil Writ Petition No.9038 of 2006 (O&M) : 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: January 15, 2009 Sham Singh .....Petitioner VERSUS Financial Commissioner, Appeals-II, Punjab & another, ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr.J.R.Mittal, Senior Advocate with Mr.Kashmira Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.P.C.Goyal, Addl.A.G.Punjab, for respondent No.1. Mr.Arun Palli, Senior Advocate with Mr.Parminder Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.2. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. Grievance is made against the order passed by Financial Commissioner on 9.8.2005. The petition pertains to mutation No.1726. This mutation was first entered in the year 1972 changing Civil Writ Petition No.9038 of 2006 (O&M) : 2 : the ownership of the land from Central Government to the name of respondent No.2. Petitioner states that the said mutation was rejected by Collector on 8.6.1987. Commissioner had also dismissed the appeal, but respondent No.2 filed a review which is allowed despite stay granted by Financial Commissioner. The petitioner instead of impugning this order on merits, has raised some oblique grounds to challenge this order. After referring that the appeal filed by respondent No.2 was dismissed by the Commissioner, Patiala, it is mentioned that a review was sought. Before deciding this review, the Commissioner allegedly gave his mind in the open court that he was going to allow the review since he was under pressure from Malkiat Singh Birmi, the then Minister (Jails). In this background, petitioner approached the Financial Commissioner to transfer the case to some other Commissioner, when on 6.4.2004, the Financial Commissioner directed the Commissioner not to pass the final order. Still, the review application was allowed on 20.4.2004, which the petitioner learnt on 5.5.2004 and also the fact that the presence of his counsel was marked though he was not present. Such a plea as raised may sound impressive, but deeper analysis of the situation would show that the petitioner has not made the present approach in a fair manner. Except for baldly asserting that the Commissioner expressed himself to be under the influence of the then Minister, no proof in this regard has been furnished. It will be dangerous precedent to accept such assertion only made in the petition because it is so easy to make such accusations in order to seek relief. Civil Writ Petition No.9038 of 2006 (O&M) : 3 : Mr.Arun Palli, Senior counsel representing the respondent-Wakf Board has drawn my attention to the facts in detail and the background in which the petitioner has filed one litigation after another taking different stands. The counsel has alleged material concealment of facts on the part of petitioner, which, according to the counsel would be enough to decline him the discretionary relief. A detailed reply is filed by the respondents. Mr.Palli would point out that petitioner Sham Singh took this property measuring 130 kanals in the name of his wife on a temporary yearly lease @ Rs.850/- per month from answering respondent No.2, i.e., Punjab Wakf Board. The Petitioner had executed relevant document, including Kabuliatnama in favour of the Board admitting the ownership of the Board over the suit property. The counsel would then point out that wife of the petitioner got the name of their associates entered in khasra girdawri at the back of answering respondent by suffering a collusive decree. These persons, including the petitioner, then applied for transfer of land on the basis of their possession. This application, however, was rejected on the ground that the land was of a Wakf Board and not of the Central Government. This order was taken in appeal. When the Wakf Board learnt about the same, it moved an application for being impleaded as a party. The appeal was ultimately dismissed. It is observed that the change in khasra girdawri was obtained to circumvent the judicial admission by the wife. These orders were further challenged with an attempt to get this land transferred, ultimately leading to filing of a writ petition. The petitioner, thus, got order in his favour on 28.9.1993 Civil Writ Petition No.9038 of 2006 (O&M) : 4 : from this court without impleading the Wakf Board as a party. When the Board learnt about the same, it immediately made an application for becoming a party and review of the order passed by this court. This court then not only re-called the earlier order passed in favour of the petitioner, but dismissed the writ with costs of Rs.5,000/- against each of the petitioners therein. A proceedings for contempt action were also directed. The petitioner then tendered an unconditional apology in the contempt proceedings when the rule was discharged. This all happened in the year 1994. The petitioner still did not desist from making an attempt to get the property allotted by concealing the above referred facts by filing an application before Naib Tehsildar, Sales, Mullanpur Dakha. When this application was dismissed, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Sales Commissioner. On learning about the same, the Wakf Board made an application for being impleaded and so the appeal was rejected. The petitioner still had not desisted from his unfair and illegal approach and moved the Collector, Ludhiana, which was dismissed by noticing that the petitioner in the civil suit had conceded that he was tenant under the Wakf Board. It was also observed that the petitioner was making an attempt to misappropriate this land belonging to the Wakf Board on the basis of a possession by manipulating one ground or the other. It may need a notice that the property, which belongs to the Wakf Board, is not transferable on the basis of a possession. It is in this background, that the petitioner got the mutation No.1726 reviewed at the back of the respondent- Wakf Board, which had earlier been sanctioned in favour of the Board. In this attempt also, the petitioner remained unsuccessful. Civil Writ Petition No.9038 of 2006 (O&M) : 5 : Still, the petitioner made an application before Assistant Collector Ist Grade concealing the fact that similar prayer had earlier been dismissed. The mutation was lost/destroyed when the Deputy Commissioner ordered Masanna to be prepared. Since there had been no challenge to the original mutation, the Financial Commissioner held that preparation of Masanna cannot be challenged being an administrative decision only. This was taken by the petitioner to have another round. In short, it can be noticed that petitioner has not come to this court with clean hands and has suppressed the background and the material facts while seeking equitable relief. In the background of the conduct depicted by the petitioner, it would be too unsafe to believe or rely upon the allegations made by the petitioner against Mr.Birmi. It is not understood as to how the Minister would have an interest to influence the Commissioner or the Financial Commissioner when another contesting party is a Wakf Board. This allegation appears to be a made up story. In fact, the impugned order, Annexure P-4, passed by the Divisional Commissioner would clearly show the observation made by him that the property is of Punjab Wakf Board. He accordingly found that Sham Lal and others have no locus to challenge the order of mutation as they are tenants under the Wakf Board. The Commissioner also noticed that the State of Punjab has also admitted the ownership of the Wakf Board before the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Ludhiana. It was accordingly found that the tenant has no right to deny the tittle of his landlord. The findings in this regard returned by this court were also taken note of that this property was owned by Wakf board when the Commissioner Civil Writ Petition No.9038 of 2006 (O&M) : 6 : passed the impugned order. In this background, the present petition is wholly misconceived and as such deserves to be dismissed and is so dismissed. January 15, 2009 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE