Petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking restoration of land possession and action against officials. The Court held that disputed questions of fact precluded writ intervention.
Petitioner directed to approach Civil Court or appropriate forum.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CWP No.11189 of 2013
1
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.11189 of 2013
Date of decision: 22.05.2013
Pradeep Kumar Sharma
-----Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana and others
----Respondents
CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURMEET SINGH SANDHAWALIA
Present:Mr. Amit Rawal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Gaurav Rana, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ajay Kumar Mittal,J .
CWP No.11189 of 2013
2
Jamabandis.
CWP No.11189 of 2013
3
Faridabad. Vide order dated 13.5.2008, Annexure P.11, the first appellate authority directed the Public Information officer to supply complete information to the petitioner within seven days. On 30.6.2008, the petitioner went to his village to enquire about the status of land and came to know that land had already been sold fraudulently in connivance with the Patwari and Tehsildar etc. Accordingly representation dated 30.6.2008, Annexure P.12 was made to SSP, Faridabd for registration of FIR against Mehar Chand, Mohan Singh, Numberdar, Halqa Patwari, Halqa Kanungo and Tehsildar of the area under Sections 406/420/467/468/471/120-B IPC. However, no action thereon was taken by the police authorities. The petitioner filed an appeal before the State Information Commissioner, Haryana who vide order dated 30.1.2009, directed the Commissioner, Gurgaon Division and District Collector Faridabad to take appropriate action. The petitioner received letter dated 28.6.2010, Annexure P.14 from the Assistant Public Information Officer-cumTehsildar, Faridabad wherein it was admitted that the aforesaid land measuring 2 kanals 2 marlas was purchased by Smt. Krishna Sharma wife of Shri S.R.Sharma out of Shamlat Deh Village Mauza Ankhir, Tehsil Ballabhgarh, District Faridabad from one Mehar Chand son of Nihal Chand. It was further admitted that mutation No.1293, though sanctioned, could not be incorporated while preparing the Jamabandi for the year 1987-88 by mistake. Later on, Mehar Chand died and his property was inherited by his son Rajinder and daughter Raj Bala i.e. Respondent Nos. 9 and 10. According to the petitioner, taking
CWP No.11189 of 2013
4
advantage of the intentional mistake of the revenue authorities, respondent Nos. 9 and 10 sold land measuring 8 kanals to Vimal Kumar son of Vidya Sagar vide sale deed dated 19.2.1998. They further sold remaining 8 kanals of land to Ashok Nath son of Rajeshwar Nath vide sale deed dated 19.2.1998. It was further intimated that the said land had already been acquired by the HUDA. The petitioner has neither been paid compensation nor action has been taken by the police authorities against the erring officials despite his representations. The petitioner even filed CWP No.1532 of 2011 which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 27.1.2011, Annexure P.16 with liberty to take recourse to alternative remedy. On 14.1.2012, Annexure P.17, the petitioner approached the Deputy Commissioner for release of compensation. On 13.12.2012, Annexure P.20, the petitioner was informed by the Land Acquisition Officer that since the Jamabadi did not show the petitioner to be the rightful owner, the amount of compensation could not be awarded to him. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner is before this Court through the present writ petition.
CWP No.11189 of 2013
5
is dismissed. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may avail remedy before the Civil Court or any other appropriate forum in accordance with law.
(Ajay Kumar Mittal) Judge
May 22, 2013 (Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia) 'gs' Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the disputed questions of fact regarding land ownership and mutation entries can be adjudicated in writ jurisdiction.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Pradeep Kumar Sharma
State of Haryana and others
Ajay Kumar Mittal
Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
