IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-12093-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision :01.05.2025 VIKAS BHARDWAJ AND OTHERS …Petitioners Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present : Mr. Kartar Singh Malik, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Upasana Dhawan, A.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-12) passed by the learned Commissioner, Rohtak Division, Rohtak.

2. Briefly, respondent No.3-Pawan filed an application for partition of joint land comprised in khewat No.96/74 (as per Jamabandi for the year 2020-21) measuring 49 kanals–9 marlas, situated at village Brahmanwas, Tehsil and District Rohtak.

2.1 The present petitioners (who were impleaded as respondents No.1 to 3 in the partition application) appeared in the partition proceedings and submitted their reply, thereby controverting the stand taken by respondent No.3-Pawan in his partition application, especially the claim made by respondent No.3 as regards killa No.52//3/1 and 52//7 and asserting their possession on the said Killa No.

2.2 In the afore-said partition proceedings, mode of partition came to be approved on 20.06.2023 (Annexure P-5) and thereafter, naksha kha was called from the field staff.

2.3 Upon receipt of the naksha kha on the file, objections thereto were called from the parties whereupon, the petitioners submitted their objections (Annexure P-7) to the effect that the land comprised in killa Nos.52//2/1, 2/2, 3/1/1 and 3/1/2 are adjacent to the road and therefore, more valuable than the other land, however, killa Nos.52//2/2 and 3/1 has been wrongly given to the respondents. Another objection was raised regarding killa No.52//7, 14 by stating that the said area does not have any passage.

2.4 It appears that even respondent No.3-Pawan also submitted his objections to naksha kha by stating that in killa No.52//2 and 3/1, his share comes to 03 kanal-10 marlas whereas, he has been provided only 01 kanal – 13 marlas, which was wrong and also that the area adjoining to the road was more valuable, therefore, the same be allotted to all the co-sharers as per their share.

2.5 The afore-said objections were considered by the learned Assistant Collector, however, finding no merit therein, the same were rejected vide order dated 28.02.2024 (Annexure P-8).

2.6 Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid order dated 28.02.2024 (Annexure P-8), respondent No.3-Pawan filed an appeal before the learned Collector, Rohtak, which came to be allowed vide order dated 20.08.2024 (Annexure P-10) by observing as under :-

“After examining the documents available on the file, perusing the orders of the lower court and the approved Naksha Khe, analyzing the spot report of the Tehsildar Rohtak and comparatively considering the arguments of the learned advocates, I Kanab Lakra, District Revenue Officer, Authorized Collector, Rohtak, have come to the conclusion that the appeal 104/Appeal dated 23.04.2024 filed by the appellant is accepted as a result of being found logical, legal and strong. The lower court is directed that in compliance with the letter number 2872 dated 24.03.2022 of the Hon’ble Finance Commissioner Haryana Government, Chandigarh, that the suit land bearing Mustkil No.52//2, 3/1 which is more valuable than other land, Killa No.52//3/1 (Min East) be allotted to the appellant as per his possession, cultivation and irrigation resources. The land of defendant Vikas etc. be completed from Mustkil No.52//2/2 and 8/2 and as per rules, way should be given to 8/2 from Killa No.2/2. The excess portion of defendant Aadesh etc. be cut from 52//2/1 and as per rules, the deficiency should be completed from the adjoining land in Mustkil No.77, less