131

-.- -.-

HARSH BUNGER, J. (ORAL)

1. Prayer in the instant civil writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India, inter alia, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for setting aside the order dated 19.02.2024 (Annexure P-5); order dated 06.05.2024 (Annexure P-6); order dated 30.10.2024 (Annexure P-7); orders dated 27.03.2025 (Annexure P-9 and Annexure P-10, respectively), passed by learned Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Kharkhoda (in short 'Assistant Collector'), District Sonepat.

1.1 A further prayer has been made for setting aside the order dated 17.02.2026 (Annexure P-15), passed by learned Commissioner, Rohtak Division, Rohtak (in short 'Divisional Commissioner').

2. Briefly, respondent No. 4 (Ajay Pal) sought partition of joint land, comprised in Khewat No. 532/501, measuring 28 Kanal – 6 Marla (as per jamabandi for the year 2020-21), situated at village Rohana, Tehsil Kharkhoda District Sonepat. In the said partition application, petitioner (Jai Pal alias Jai Pal Sharma) was impleaded as respondent No. 6.

2.1 It appears that in the aforesaid partition proceedings, notices were issued to respective parties; however, since respondents in the partition application did not appear, accordingly, learned Assistant Collector directed that the service upon the parties be effected through proclamation (mustri munadi).

2.2 Since petitioner and also other co-sharers (respondents in the partition application) did not appear despite mustri munadi, they were proceeded against ex-parte, vide order dated 19.02.2024 (Annexure P-5). It appears that some other respondents in the partition application were proceeded against ex-parte, vide order dated 06.05.2024 (Annexure P-6).

2.3 Thereafter, learned Assistant Collector proceeded with the partition proceedings and mode of partition came to be approved, vide order dated 30.10.2024 (Annexure P-7). On the basis of approved mode of partition, Naksha 'Kha' was called from the field staff.

2.4 Upon receipt of Naksha 'Kha', the same was approved, vide order dated 24.02.2025 (Annexure P-8), followed by Naksha 'Ga', which was approved, vide order dated 27.03.2025 (Annexure P-9) and partition proceedings were concluded with the drawing of sanad takseem, vide order dated 27.03.2025 (Annexure P-10).

2.5 Apparently, petitioner challenged partition proceedings/sanad takseem by filing a revision petition before learned Divisional Commissioner; however, the same was dismissed, vide order dated 17.02.2026 (Annexure P-15).

3. In the aforementioned circumstances, the petitioner has filed the instant civil writ petition for the relief(s), as noticed hereinabove.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that learned Assistant Collector has erred in law and facts in conducting partition proceedings inasmuch as that petitioner has been wrongly proceeded against ex-parte without following due process under Section 20 of Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 (in short '1887 Act'). It is further submitted that in the mode of partition, a separate khewat for the petitioner has not been carved out and even while carrying out the partition proceedings, the possession of petitioner has been disturbed, which is contrary to mode of partition, which provided that the partition will be carried out by keeping the possession intact. It is also submitted that one of respondents in the partition application, namely, Ram Chander had already expired; however, his legal heirs were not brought on record, therefore, partition proceedings against a dead man are nullity. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer has been made for setting aside partition proceedings/sanad takseem.

5. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and perused the paperbook with his able assistance.

6. Evidently, in the partition proceedings initiated at the instance of respondent No. 4 (Ajay Pal), learned Assistant Collector issued notices to respective co-sharers. It appears that s