Disposed

Charanjit Singh v. Financial Commissioner (Revenue) and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Mar 2017CWP/20598/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this public interest litigation, the Court examined a challenge to an order allowing mutation of land. Holding that mutation cannot be kept in abeyance and the remedy for correction lies in Civil Court, the Court upheld the impugned order but granted liberty to file a civil suit. The writ petition was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order upheld; liberty granted to petitioner to recount the order or file a fresh civil suit.

Charanjit Singh Vs Financial Commissioner… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

CWP No.20598 of 2016

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.20598 of 2016 Date of decision:02.03.2017

¶5

Charanjit Singh ... Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Punjab and others ... Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶9

Present:Mr. B.S.Bhalla, Advocate and Mr. Harkaran Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

AMIT RAWAL J. (Oral)

¶11

The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is to the impugned order dated 01.12.2015 (Annexure P-6), whereby, the revision petition filed by the private respondents with regard to correction of entries of jamabandies by way of fard badar of land and mutation in respect of land comprised in khasra no.163//25/5(2-7) which is banjar qadim in nature on the premise of sale deed, whereas, the petitioner is also claiming ownership on the basis of another sale deed executed in favour of private respondents. According to the facts culled out in the impugned order, deed dated 08.02.1985, the disputed khasra fell out into share of respondent no.2, whereas, as per sale deed dated 08.02.1986, it fell into share of respondent No.2 to the extent of only 7 marlas.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the application could not have been filed by Harchand Singh for correction of the entries of jamabandis and mutation as it is a clerical error and can be corrected at any time. If at all, he had any grievance, he could

¶13

CWP No.20598 of 2016 {2}

¶14

have availed the remedy by filing a civil suit, thus, the order of the Financial Commissioner allowing the revision petition is not only erroneous, much less perverse.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and appraised the paper book.

¶16

During the course of hearing of the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner has very fairly apprised the Court with regard to filing of the civil suit, much less its withdrawal owing to the pursuance of the proceedings before the Revenue Court.

¶17

It is settled law that mutation cannot be kept pending/or in abeyance.

¶18

In my view, the remedy for the petitioner is only in Civil Court and not before the quasi-judicial authorities as indicated above. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to move an application for recalling of the order or file a fresh suit giving reasons. The mutation is only for fiscal purposes and the same can always be corrected, in case, the petitioner is able to succeed in the suit on the basis of the preponderance of evidence.

¶19

With the aforementioned observations, the impugned order is hereby upheld with the aforesaid liberty.

¶20

Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of.

¶21

	(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE
March 02, 2017
savita
Whether Speaking/Reasoned	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	Yes/No

Charanjit Singh v. Financial Commissioner (Revenue) and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Charanjit Singh v. Financial Commissioner (Revenue) and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surjit Singh Vs the Financial Commissioner Animal Husbandry Pb Chandigarh and Ors.

Chuni Lal and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Mohd. Ali Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Lakhbir Singh and Anr. Vs Financial Commissioner

Harfool Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Sajan Singh @ Sajjana @ Sampat Vs Financial Commissioner and Ors.