Savitri Devi @ Kanto vs State Of Haryana And Others

Jagmohan Bansal, J

The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226/227 is seeking direction to respondent-Authority to register her sale deed. She is further seeking directions to decide her representation dated 24.12.2025.

On 28.01.2026, this Court passed the following order:

“Counsel for the petitioner states that the dispute between the parties was settled before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and a compromise dated 13.12.2024, Annexure P-4, was entered into. He states that in terms of the compromise, when the parties approached the registering authority for registration of sale deed, it was refused on the ground that FIR, Annexure P- 3, is pending.

Advance copy of the petition has been served upon the official respondents.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Ravish Kaushik, Additional Advocate General, Haryana puts in appearance on behalf of the official respondents No.1 and 2 and requests for short accommodation to get instructions.

List on 05.03.2026.”

Learned State counsel submits that competent authority has not issued requisite instructions.

The matter is pending before this Court since 28.01.2026 and there seems no reason to keep it further pending. It would be in the interest of justice and fitness of things if respondent No.2-Sub-Registrar/Tehsildar, Kalka is directed to consider petitioner’s grievance and take an appropriate decision within 4 weeks from today. Respondent No.2 shall consider documents submitted by the petitioner and proceed in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.

It is made clear that nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as expression of opinion of this Court on merits of the case.