Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kamalbir Singh vs Financial Commissioner ... on 11 October, 2012
Letters Patent Appeal No.1601 of 2012 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
Letters Patent Appeal No.1601 of 2012
Date of Decision: 11.10.2012
Kamalbir Singh ..Appellant
Financial Commissioner (Appeals-I), Punjab and others
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE REKHA MITTAL
Present: Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate for the appellant.
RAJIVE BHALLA, J. (ORAL)
The appellant prays that order dated 20.7.2012 dismissing his writ petition may be set aside.
The appellant, filed an application before Assistant Collector IInd Grade, Nabha, for correction of khasra girdawaries of the years 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. The application was allowed, vide order dated 30.6.2006. Rajinder Singh, respondent No.5, filed an appeal before the Collector which was dismissed on 25.9.2006. The Commissioner dismissed a revision filed by respondent no.5 on 21.11.2007. The Financial Commissioner (Appeals-I), Punjab, set aside these orders by holding that revenue authorities had no jurisdiction to correct khasra girdawaries, as entries had already been recorded in jamabandies. Aggrieved by this order, the appellant filed a writ petition, which has been dismissed.
Counsel for the appellant submits that as khasra girdawaries were corrected after spot inspection, orders passed by the Assistant Collector IInd Grade, the Collector and the Commissioner should not have been set aside. It is further submitted that as a civil court has, vide order dated 03.04.2006, directed parties to maintain status quo and left the matter regarding revenue entries to be decided by revenue authorities, the correction ordered by Assistant Collector IInd Grade, Nabha, should have been affirmed. It is further submitted that as Rajinder Singh filed an application for appointment of a receiver, it amounts to an admission on his part, that he is not in possession of the land, in dispute.
We have heard counsel for the appellant, perused the impugned orders and express our inability to entertain the appeal.
Admittedly, jamabandies for the years 1997-98 and 2002-03, record Rajinder Singh in possession. If these entries are incorrect, the appellant was required to challenge them by filing a civil suit as required by section 45 of the Punjab Lands Revenue Act, 1887 (hereinafter referred to as the "1887 Act"). The appellant, instead of availing remedy under Section 45 of the 1887 Act, approached a revenue officer to change khasra girdawaries with an apparent object that, after correction, he would be able to prove his possession. The application was allowed, but was rightly rejected by the Financial Commissioner. An entry once recorded in a jamabandi, cannot be rectified, by revenue officers and the only remedy of an aggrieved person, is to file a civil suit under section 45 of the 1887 Act. A civil suit is, admittedly, pending adjudication. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with liberty to the appellant to approach the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade/Collector, Nabha, District Patiala, for recording an entry in the `remarks column' of the relevant jamabandi, that a civil suit is pending.
Disposed of accordingly.
( RAJIVE BHALLA )
11.10.2012 ( REKHA MITTAL )
VK/ avin JUDGE