IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 10385 of 2010 Date of Decision: August 08, 2011 Gurpreet Singh ….Petitioner Versus Financial Commissioner (Appeals-I), Punjab and others. … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: Mr. Yogesh Aneja, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Jaswinder Singh, DAG,Punjab. Mr. Kamal Narula, Advocate, for respondent No.7. Mr. S.P.S. Tinna, Advocate, for respondent No.13. Mr. S.S.Sidhu, Advocate, for respondent No.29. Mr. A.K. Khunger, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 32 and 34. 1. Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Present petition is being disposed of with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties in the following terms:- CWP No.10385 of 2010 i) Father of the petitioner, who was respondent No.3 before the Revenue Authorities, had expired on 21.05.2006 during the pendency of the proceedings and before the Naksha Bey-Zeem was received, however, petitioner, being legal heirs of respondent No.3 before the Revenue Authorities, was never impleaded and proceedings of partition were finalized in the absence of petitioner against the dead person; ii) Impugned order dated 04.10.2006 shall stand set aside. Parties shall appear before the learned Assistant Collector on 30.08.2011. iii) Learned Assistant Collector shall, after hearing all the parties, conclude the partition proceedings in accordance with law within 90 days thereafter. August 08, 2011 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 2