Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, J. (Oral): - The present revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 04.01.2016 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Moga vide which application for appointment of Local Commissioner was dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon Sri Subhas Mandal and anr. v. Sri Monoranjan Samanta and another 2015(4) WBLR 268; Shanu Baheti v. Municipal Council, Pali and another 2012(1) DNJ 364 and Sarala Jain and others v. Sangu Gangadhar and others, 2016(3) Andh LD 197 and contended that interference in the revision petition against the order declining the appointment of Local Commissioner falls within the ambit of Article 227 of the Constitution of India for which discretion can be exercised.

3. I have learned counsel for the parties.

4. It is a settled position that no party can be allowed to take recourse to the process of the Court for collecting evidence. The order rejecting prayer for appointment of Local Commissioner is not revisable in view of ratio of law laid down in Harvinder Kaur and another v. Godha Ram and another, 1979 AIR (Punjab) 76; M/s Mohinder Kumar Rajinder Parkash Dalmir Singh alias Dalmira an