Jasbir Singh and Another vs Financial Commissioner (Co-operation), Punjab, Chandigarh and Others

Ranjit Singh, J.—Respondent No. 5, Makhan Singh, filed an application for partition of land before the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Shahkot, on 4.6.2007. The final order of partition was made on 23.9.2008. The petitioners filed an appeal before the Collector, which was dismissed on 7.7.2009. Tehsildar, Shahkot, sent a report to the Additional Commissioner, Jalandhar, stating that the petitioners are in possession of a particular khasra number, where they had sown wheat crop. Still, revision was dismissed on 11.2.2010. The petitioners then filed a revision before the Financial Commissioner, which was dismissed on 21.5.2010. The sole submission made by counsel for the petitioners is based on Section 20 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (for short, "the Act"). His grievance is that service was effected on the petitioners through proclamation on 21.8.2007 without following proper procedure as given in Section 20 of the Act. Counsel further submits that the petitioners were residing in Canada, whereas proclamation was done in the Village. Neither this was proper mode of effecting service on the petitioners as per Section 20 of the Act nor it could be considered an appropriate mode of service to the petitioners. On coming to know about the impugned order, the petitioners did file an appeal or revision, as the case may be, but the same has been dismissed without considering the aspect that the petitioners were not properly served.

Section 20 of the Act prescribes a procedure for effecting service in such like cases. The option of service through proclamation can only be resorted to by first having exhausting the other modes as provided u/s 20 of the Act. Reference to Section 20 of the Act would be of benefit, which reads as under:-

Mode of service of summons: - (1) A summons issued by a Revenue-officer shall, if practicable, be served (a) personally on the person to whom it is addressed or failing him (b) his recognized agent or (c) an adult male member of his family usually residing with him.

(2) If service cannot be so made, or if acceptance of service so made is refused, the summons may be served by posting a copy thereof at the usual or last known place of residence of the person to whom it is addressed, or if that person does not reside in the district in which the Revenue-officer is employed and the case to which the summons relates has reference to land in that district, then by posting a copy of the summons on some conspicuous place in or near the estate wherein the land is situate.

(3) If the summons relates to a case in which persons having the same interest are so numerous that personal service on all of them is not reasonably practicable, it may, if the Revenue-officer so directs, be served by delivery of a copy thereof to such of those persons as the Revenue-officer nominates in this behalf and by proclamation of the contents thereof for the information of the other persons interested.

(4) A summons may, if the Revenue-officer so directs, be served on the person named therein, either in addition to, or in substitution for, any other mode of service, by forwarding the summons by post in a letter addressed to the person and registered under Part III of the [Indian Post Office Act, 1866 (XIV of 1866)].

(5) When a summons is so forwarded in a letter, and it is proved that the letter was properly addressed and duly posted and registered, the Revenue-officer may presume that the summons was served at the time when the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

In view of this and the fact that proclamation was done in the Village whereas the petitioners were known to the residing in Canada, the mode of effecting service on the petitioner can not be considered legal and proper mode of service being in violation of Section 20 of the Act.

The impugned orders, therefore, can not be sustained and the same are set-aside. Since the petitioners are now put to notice and are aware of these proceedings, I would deem it appropriate to remand this case back to the Assistant Collector 1st Grade for hearing the petitioners and the parties concerned and pass a fresh order in accordance with law. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.