IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

166 RA-CW-503-2025 in CWP-25204-2025 Date of decision: 13.11.2025 Vijay Singh ....Review applicant/Petitioner Vs.

State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present: Mr. Sumeet Jain, Advocate for the applicant/petitioner.

Mr. Pankaj Mulwani, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

*****

HARSH BUNGER J. (Oral)

By way of the present review application, the review applicant/petitioner seeks a review of the judgment dated 28.08.2025 (Annexure A-1) passed by this Court in CWP No. 25204 of 2025.

2. Learned counsel for the review applicant/petitioner submits that the present review application has been filed in pursuance to the liberty granted by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 3131 of 2025 vide order dated 31.10.2025. The relevant extract thereof reads as follows:-

“After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the appellant submits that certain arguments raised before the learned Single Judge does not find mention in the order, hence, the present appeal may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed any further at this stage with liberty to file a review application. In case, after the decision of review, the appellant is still aggrieved, he can avail appropriate remedy including the remedy of appeal. Ordered accordingly.”

3. Learned counsel for the review applicant submits that various statutory provisions as contained in Haryana Land Records Manual have not been considered by this Court while passing the judgment under review. It is submitted that, Clause 18.6(a) and (b) of the Haryana Land Records Manual have not been complied with by the Revenue Authorities while conducting partition proceedings and no first visit report was prepared. It is further submitted that even no notice was issued to the review applicant in terms of Clause 18.15 of the Haryana Land Records Manual. It is next submitted that on the land which is in possession of petitioner; a room and tubewell have been in existence for the last 40-50 years, which aspect has not been considered by this Court. It is further contended that, the earlier partition proceedings are the subject matter of two civil suits, which were still pending consideration, therefore, the instant partition proceedings were not permissible in law.

4. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer has been made for reviewing the judgment dated 31.10.2025 passed by this Court in CWP-25204-2025. 5 Heard.

6. As regard the first contention of the review applicant that the Revenue Authorities have not complied with the provisions contained in the Haryana Land Records Manual; suffice it to say that the Haryana Land Records Manual is a compendium of administrative instructions issued by the learned Financial Commissioner in exercise of administrative powers conferred by the Haryana Land Revenue Act and they must confirm to the statutory provisions contained in the Haryana Land Revenue Act. By relying upon the provisions contained in the Haryana Land Records Manual, the review applicant is trying to impress upon this Court that, since first visit report was not prepared regarding possession, construction, tubewells and cultivation at the spot before preparation of Naksha Alif, therefore, entire partition proceedings are vitiated. In my considered view, the instructions contained in the Haryana Land Records Manual for preparing a first visit report are only to corroborate the factual position emanating from the Revenue Records i.e. Jamabandi/Khasra Girdawri etc. The said first visit report cannot displace the entries which are already existing in the revenue records.

6.1 In my considered view, if any party is claiming possession of any particular area, which is otherwise not reflected in the revenue record (Jamabandi/Khasra Girdawari etc.); no reliance can be placed upon any site visit report, which may have been prepared. I am also of the view that non- preparation of first site visit report would not vitiate the partition procee