C.W.P. No.9583 of 1989 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.9583 of 1989 Date of Decision:22.10.2009 Balwant Singh and another .....Petitioners versus Union of India and others .....Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Mehinder Singh Sullar. Present: Mr.R.K.Verma, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms.Palika Monga, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for respondent Nos.2 and 3. Mr.R.N.Lohan, Advocate, for respondent No.4. **** Mehinder Singh Sullar, J. The matrix of the facts culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal, of the present civil writ petition and emanating from the record, is that the land in dispute which was evacuee property situated in village Karnoli, Tehsil Fatehabad, District Hisar, was allotted to one Amin Chand son of Chatra, resident of village Birthewari, Tehsil and District Jind, by the Rehabilitation Department. The original allottee sold the land in dispute to Inder Sain son of Chuni Lal vide registered sale deed dated 28.06.1982. The petitioners were stated to have purchased the land in dispute from Inder Sain son of Chuni Lal. In the wake of reference from the Assistant Registrar-cum-Managing Officer, Rehabilitation Department, the Chief Settlement Commissioner set aside the proprietors rights granted to the allottee vide impugned order dated 14.05.1987 (Annexure P-4). The petitioners filed the revision petition against the order (Annexure P-4) C.W.P. No.9583 of 1989 2 before the Financial Commissioner and the Secretary, Rehabilitation Department, Haryana, who while admitting both the revision petitions called for the record and issued notice to the parties. He, however, declined the prayer for stay vide impugned order indicated in Annexure P-5. The petitioners did not feel satisfied with the impugned order indicated in the letter, Annexure P-5, filed the present writ petition. Meaning thereby, the revisional authority did not decide the matter on merits. The petitioners have filed the present writ petition against the order refusing them to grant stay of the impugned order (Annexure P-4). This is the conceded position at the bar. Once the main subject matter is pending for adjudication before the revisional authority yet to be decided the same on merits then to my mind no relief can be granted to the petitioners in the present writ petition by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India in the obtaining circumstances of the case. Thus, being the position on record, the civil writ petition is hereby dismissed without prejudice to the rights of the petitioners in any manner in the disposal of the revision petition. October 22, 2009 ( Mehinder Singh Sullar) seema Judge