Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Darshan Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 September, 2021

Author: Sudhir Mittal

Bench: Sudhir Mittal

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

Sr. No.119                           Civil Writ Petition No.17939 of 2021
                                     Date of Decision : September 10, 2021

Darshan Singh                                                    ...Petitioner

                                         Versus

State of Punjab and others                                    ...Respondents


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR MITTAL


Present:     Mohd. Yousaf, Advocate, for the petitioner.

             *****

SUDHIR MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that six applications for partition have been filed. The petitioner filed an application for clubbing all of them. The said application was allowed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade. The same was challenged by respondent No.3 before the Commissioner by way of a revision petition. The said revision petition has been dismissed. He has further approached the Financial Commissioner by way of ROR No.220 of 2021, which is pending. In the said ROR, the petitioner has filed an application for clarifying order dated 12.03.2021, but the said application has not been decided till date. Milling season is about to start and if, the application is not decided early, the petitioner will not be allotted any paddy as the concerned authorities have rejected his application for allotment on the ground of pending partition proceedings.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 & 2 only.

Ms. Anju Sharma Kaushik, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 & 2 and waives service.

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 11-09-2021 04:07:37 ::: Civil Writ Petition No.17939 of 2021 --2--

Mr. Chandeep Singh, Advocate puts in appearance on behalf of respondent No.32-SBI.

Considering the nature of the order being passed, no reply is necessary.

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to take up the application filed by the petitioner in the pending ROR No.220 of 2021 on the next date of hearing i.e. 15.09.2021 and decide the same.

September 10, 2021                                         (SUDHIR MITTAL)
Ankur                                                          JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned                Yes/No

Whether Reportable                       Yes/No




                                2 of 2
             ::: Downloaded on - 11-09-2021 04:07:38 :::