Nikka Ram And Others vs State Of H.P. & Ors

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

Both these petitions arise out of order dated 30.11.2017 passed by the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Himachal Pradesh, whereby two revision petitions preferred by the petitioner against the concurrent orders passed by the Revenue Authorities in two separate partition cases were dismissed.

The petitioner presented two applications under Section 123 of the H.P. Land Revenue Act before the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade for partition of joint land situated at revenue estate Village Barota, Pargna Ajmerpur (registered as Case No.43/9 of 2015) and another in respect of the joint land situated at revenue estate Dumehar, Pargna Ajmerpur (registered as Case No.44/9 of 2015). The Assistant Collector 2nd Grade devised the mode of partition in both the cases on 07.01.2015. The mode of partition was not challenged by any of the parties, hence, it attained finality. The process thereafter started for carrying out actual partition on the spot in accordance with the sanctioned mode of partition. It appears that a local commissioner was appointed by the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade for carrying out the partition in accordance with the sanctioned mode of partition. The record also shows that the present respondents gave their consent for appointment of local commissioner. The local commissioner conducted the demarcation on 31.01.2015 and carried out the partition. The objections thereafter were filed by the respondents before the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade. In these objections, the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade passed an order on 29.07.2015, observing that the partition on the spot had not been carried out in accordance with the sanctioned mode of partition. The Assistant Collector 2nd Grade summoned the local commissioner, whereafter statement of local commissioner was recorded and the objections of the respondents were dismissed on 29.07.2015.

The respondents assailed the order dated 29.07.2015 before the Collector, Sub-Division Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur. Respondents’ appeal was allowed by the Collector on 29.04.2016 and the order dated 29.07.2015 passed by the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade was set aside. Petitioner assailed the order passed by the Collector before the Divisional Commissioner. On 18.02.2017, the Divisional Commissioner dismissed the revision petition and affirmed the order passed by the Collector. Petitioner’s second revision petition has also been dismissed on 30.11.2017 by the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Himachal Pradesh. In the aforesaid circumstances, the petitioner has now filed these two writ petitions.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that no case for interference with the impugned orders is made out.

The Assistant Collector 2nd Grade while considering the objections preferred by the respondents against the partition carried out on the spot, had himself passed an order on 21.05.2015 that the partition had not been carried out on the spot in accordance with the sanctioned mode of partition, however, in the final order passed by the Assistant Collector 2 nd Grade on 29.07.2015, there is no discussion whatsoever as to how and on what basis, the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade came to the conclusion that the partition carried out on the spot was in accordance with the approved mode of partition. The order passed by the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade on 29.07.2015 was non-speaking and unreasoned. Factual findings were returned concurrently by all the three revenue courts that the procedure prescribed in law for overseeing actual partition of joint holding in terms of approved mode of partition had not been complied with. The Collector, the Divisional Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Himachal Pradesh did not commit any illegality or irregularity in setting aside the order passed by the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade on 29.07.2015 and by remanding the matter to the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade for carrying out partition on the spot in accordance with law and as per approved mode of partition.

For the foregoing reasons, I find no merit in the instant writ petitions. The same are accordingly dismissed alongwith pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. The parties, through their learned counsel, are directed to appear before the concerned Assistant Collector 2nd Grade on 01.08.2023.