Dismissed

Jatinder Singh & Ors. v. Director Land Records Pb Jalandhar & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Feb 2015CWP/3161/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the dismissal of a consolidation petition under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings Act. The Court held that the allotment of specific Khasra numbers to the petitioners was fair and equitable.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings Act, 1948 was dismissed.

Jatinder Singh & Ors. Vs Director Land Records Pb… — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.3161 of 2015 Date of Decision: February 23, 2015

¶3

Jatinder Singh and others .....Petitioners versus

¶4

Director, Land Records, Punjab and others

¶5

.....Respondents

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH.

¶7

Present:Mr.G.S.Nagra, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶8

-.-

¶9

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶10

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶11

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶12

¶13

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶14

The petitioners moved a petition under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, in the year 2009, inter-alia, alleging that at the time of consolidation which took place in the years 1984-85, Khasra No.611 was required to be allotted to them but by mistake it was allotted to private-respondents, whereas Khasra No.649 ought to have been allotted to privaterespondents instead of the petitioners.

¶15

The Director, Land Records, Punjab, vide the impugned order dated 05.11.2014, has dismissed the petitioners' petition, inter-alia, on the grounds that there has been no deficiency in the allotment of good quality land to the petitioners in a particular block and that if their plea is taken to its logical conclusion, the respondents will be left with no passage to their land.

¶16

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.03.10 12:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶17

CWP No.3161 of 2015

¶18

[2]

¶19

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners at a considerable length with reference to the site-plan (Annexure P-5).

¶20

In view of the fact that at the time of consolidation, the petitioners were allotted a compact piece of land comprising Khasra Nos.609, 610, 612, 641, 643 and 649 etc., we are satisfied that allocation of land to the petitioners and private-respondents in different blocks is just, fair and equitable. No interference in the impugned order is thus called for.

¶21

Dismissed.

¶22

February 23, 2015 [RAJ MOHAN SINGH] Mohinder JUDGE

¶23

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.03.10 12:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Jatinder Singh & Ors. v. Director Land Records Pb Jalandhar & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jatinder Singh & Ors. v. Director Land Records Pb Jalandhar & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kashmir Singh Vs Director Rural Development & Panchayats Department Pb & Ors.

Mukand Singh etc. Vs State of Punjab etc.

Jai Bhagwan and Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Pirthi Raj and Ors. Vs Commissioner Ferozepur Division Ferozepur and Ors.

Jagminder Singh Vs State of Haryana&Ors.

Nanak Singh @ Nanak Chand and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.