SIBGHAT ULLAH KHAN,J. - (1.) WITH the consent of learned counsel for both the parties writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage.
(2.) THIS writ petition is directed against similar orders dated 16.01.2009 passed by S.D.O. Dhanpur, District Bijnore. The orders are only of one word "approved". Lekhpal submitted a report on 29.08.2007 to Tehsildar/S.D.O. Dhampur which is of 8 or 9 lines stating therein that plot no.49 of Khata no.108 (new number) had been shown in CH Form no. 41 and 45 prepared at the conclusion of consolidation proceedings as Khaliyan, Charagah and Rasta, however, afterwards the said plots were entered in the revenue records in names of petitioners which was against the rules and fraudulent and the position should be reverted back to the old entries of Charagaha etc. Some order of High Court of 2007 was referred to but neither the date nor the month of the order nor names of the parties have been mentioned. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the impugned orders have been passed without hearing the petitioners. In the Khatauni of the year 1415-1420 fasli where names of the petitioners were entered a note has been made scoring off their names on the basis of aforesaid orders of S.D.O. dated 16.01.2009. The Court is rather shocked to know that sub Divsional Officers are passing one word orders which materially affect the rights of parties. If the sole purpose of S.D.O. is to approve the report of Lekhpal then there is absolutely no need to maintain the office of S.D.O. It will be more appropriate to delegate the powers of S.D.O. to Lekhpal. It is rather shameful for the S.D. Os. to blindly approve the reports of Lekhpals. It virtually amounts to acceptance of supremacy of Lekhpal by S.D.O.
(3.) HOWEVER , as public property is involved hence instead of out rightly setting aside the impugned orders opportunity of post decisional hearing is provided to the petitioner. Petitioners within one month from today shall file their detailed objections before the S.D.O. Concerned which must be supported by documentary evidence and accompanied by certified copy of this order. Thereafter, S.D.O. must fix a particular date on which petitioners or their learned counsel must be heard. Thereafter S.D.O. shall pass a detailed, reasoned order. If the present S.D.O. is not capable of passing a reasoned order then D.M. shall hear the matter by himself. In the first instance for a period of one month petitioners possession shall not be disturbed. If within one month objections are filed then until decision of the objection petitioner's possession shall not be disturbed. If after hearing the petitioners in detail the S.D.O. or D.M. comes to the conclusion that the case of the petitioners is sustainable then impugned orders shall be set aside otherwise the same shall be maintained and supported by valid reasons.;