JUDGMENT :

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J.

1. As common issues are involved in the captioned petitions, with the consent of both sides, the same are hereby disposed of by this common order. For the sake of brevity and convenience, facts are borrowed from CWP-31057-2024.

2. The petitioners through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking setting aside of order dated 28.10.2024 (Annexure P-33) passed by Financial Commissioner, Haryana whereby order dated 29.12.2008 and Sanad Takseem dated 29.12.2008 issued by Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, order dated 30.05.2023 (Annexure P-20) passed by Collector and order dated 22.11.2023 (Annexure P-22) passed by Commissioner, Gurugram have been set-aside. The said Authority has also set-aside mutation No. 849 dated 10.08.2009.

3. As per pleadings, on the two applications of petitioners, partition proceedings with respect to two khewats comprising 298 Kanals (22+276) and 22 Marlas (3+19) land were initiated by Assistant Collector. The mode of partition was finalized vide order dated 28.04.2008 (Annexure P-11) and Naksha-Bey was finalized on 28.11.2008 (Annexure P-12). Sanad Takseem was issued on 29.12.2008 and mutation was sanctioned on 10.08.2009. Two brothers namely Ramesh and Chandrapal filed appeal before Collector against proceedings concluded by Assistant Collector. The matter came to be remanded back to Assistant Collector vide order dated 30.10.2012. The petitioners entered into compromise with Ramesh and Chandrapal and on the basis of agreement executed between the parties, Assistant Collector closed proceedings on 14.10.2013. As per agreement executed between the parties, the petitioners had to pay consideration in cash or by way of plots in the colony to be developed by the petitioner.

4. The respondents as per compromise got their consideration. The aforesaid persons did not challenge conclusion of proceedings, however, co-sharer i.e. Lakhmi and others filed appeal before Collector which came to be dismissed vide order dated 08.05.2014. Their claim before the Appellate Authority was that Assistant Collector has closed proceedings without hearing them. The aforesaid co-sharers filed revision which vide order dated 27.04.2018 was allowed by Revisionary Authority. The revision was allowed by way of remand. The grievance of the co-sharer was that Government acquired land should be excluded from the partition proceedings and land of two khewats could not be partitioned by one application where co-sharers are different. In their case there are two khewats i.e. 37 and 38 having 29 co-sharers.

5. In view of remand order passed by Revisionary Authority, matter had to come up for consideration before Assistant Collector but petitioners filed ROR before Financial Commissioner against the order dated 27.04.2018 passed by Revisionary Authority. The Financial Commissioner vide order dated 14.10.2021 accepted revision and set-aside order passed by Commissioner. The Financial Commissioner held that once Takseem is issued and mutation is completed, no interference is called for.

6. A few co-sharers filed writ petition before this Court against the orders passed by Financial Commissioner, however, said petition was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 18.04.2023. It is apt to notice here that while dismissing writ petition as withdrawn, this Court made observations with respect to jurisdiction of Financial Commissioner under Section 16 of Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 (for short ‘1887 Act’).

7. The respondents namely Ramesh and Chandrapal, after the expiry of almost 10 years, again woke-up and unsuccessfully filed appeal before the Collector against order dated 14.10.2013 passed by Assistant Collector. The said appeal was followed by revision before the Commissioner. They were unsuccessful in appeal before Collector as well as revision before Commissioner and further preferred ROR before Financial Commissioner. The ROR was filed in terms of Section 16 of 1887 Act. The Financ