IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-28844-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision :12.11.2025 ADESH AND ANOTHER …Petitioners Versus LD. DRO-CUM-COLLECTOR, ROHTAK AND OTHERS …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present : Mr. D.K. Tuteja, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Pankaj Mulwani, Sr. D.A.G., Haryana.

HARSH BUNGER, J. [ORAL]

Prayer in the present writ petition, filed under Articles

226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, for setting aside the order dated 20.08.2024 (Annexure P-10) passed by the learned Collector, Rohtak and also the order dated 12.03.2025 (Annexure P-11) passed by the learned Commissioner, Rohtak Division, Rohtak.

2. Briefly, respondent No.3-Pawan sought partition of agricultural land comprised in khewat No.96//74 measuring 49 kanal-9 marlas (as per jamabandi for the year 2020-21) situated at Village Brahmanwas, Tehsil and District Rohtak.

2.1 In the said partition proceedings, naksha `ka’ (Annexure P-2) was prepared and thereafter, mode of partition (Annexure P-6) was prepared on 20.06.2023. Thereafter, naksha `kha’ was received on the file and objections of the parties were called thereto; whereupon, some of the co-sharers (respondents No.3 to 6, herein) submitted their separate objections; however, the same were rejected by the learned Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Rohtak vide order dated 28.02.2024 (Annexure P-9)

and consequently, naksha `kha’ was approved.

2.2 Feeling aggrieved against the order dated 28.02.2024 (Annexure P-9), respondent No.3-Pawan preferred an appeal before the learned Collector, Rohtak, which came to be allowed vide order dated

20.08.2024 (Annexure P-10).

2.3 Being dissatisfied, the present petitioners preferred an appeal against order dated 20.08.2024 (Annexure P-10) before the learned Commissioner, Rohtak. Similarly, respondents No.4 to 6 herein preferred their revision petition against order dated 20.08.2024 (Annexure P-10) before the learned Commissioner, Rohtak. Both the afore-said cases (appeal and revision) came to be dismissed vide common order dated

12.03.2025 (Annexure P-11) passed by the learned Commissioner, Rohtak.

2.4 In the afore-mentioned circumstances, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners before this Court, for the relief as noticed here-in-above.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned Collector as well as the learned Commissioner, have erred in law and fact in passing the impugned order. It is submitted that as per the mode of partition (Annexure P-6), the partition was to be carried out by keeping the possession intact; however, vide impugned orders, the possession of the petitioners over killa No.52//2 (6-18) has been disturbed. It is further submitted that the learned Collector, while passing the order dated

20.08.2024 (Annexure P-10) has given directions to carry out partition in a particular manner; inasmuch as that the area of respondents No.4 to 6 herein has been directed to be completed from killa No.52//2/2 and 8/2 and a further directions has been given to provide rasta from killa No.52//8/2. It is contended that such kind of directions to provide rasta from a valuable land abutting the road so as to facilitate the entry of a co-sharer to another killa is arbitrary. It is next submitted that the learned Collector had further erred in not allotting killa No.52//7 to the petitioners and that the petitioners have been wrongly allocated area in rectangle No.77.

3.1 With the afore-said submissions, prayer for setting aside the impugned order has been made.

4. Heard.

5. At the outset, it would be relevant to refer to the mode of partition (Annexure P-6), the relevant extract of which reads as under :-

“1. That the land for partition is 49 Kanal 09 Marla, which is to be partitioned.

2. That while partitioning, a total of three khewats will be made, in which, the first khewat will be of the applicant, the second khewat will be of respondents No.1 and 3