- (1.) This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single judge dated March 1, 1983, in Civil Writ Petition No. 1714 of 1976 whereby the order Annexure 'P-l' dated October 10, 1974, passed by the Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab, was quashed.
(2.) According to the writ-petitioners Jagir Singh and Pal Singh, they were entitled to an area of 10 Kanals 18 Marlas during consolidation proceedings. However, they were allotted 10 Kanals 14 Marlas and, thus, there was a deficiency of 4 Marlas. Since according to them the error was arithmetical or clerical, they filed an application under section 43-A of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act') before the Consolidation Officer. The said Officer corrected the repartition and allotted them an additional 3 Marlas of land which had earlier been allotted to the Panchayat of the village. This presumably, he did taking the error to be an arithmetical one. The said order is dated August 23,1971. It was challenged by Hari Singh respondent-appellant before the Additional Director Consolidation of Holdings, under section 42 of the Act. The Additional-Director dismissed the petition on May 23, 1974 vide Annexure 'P-4' observing that he did not think there was anything wrong in the order of the Consolidation officer dated August 23, 1971. He also observed that the petitioner before him was not the Panchayat and the petitioner, that is, Hari Singh also approached him belatedly.
(3.) On the order hand, two members of the Gram Panchayat representing the Panchayat filed a petition under section 42 of the Act challenging the order of the Consolidation Officer dated August 23, 1971, afore-referred, before the same Additional Director. This came up for consideration on October 10, 1974. This time he took the view vide Annexure 'P-l' that the Consolidation Officer has wrongly used his powers under section 43-A of the Act, which section was not meant for making good the deficiency of the area of any right-holder but was only meant to correct any clerical mistake while preparing the record. Thus, the order of the Consolidation Officer was set aside vide order Annexure 'P-l' dated October 10, 1974. Against the said order, the writ-petitioners approached the Additional Director under section 42 of the Act complaining that during the repartition, they had been allotted less area and the deficiency of Marlas be made good. The Additional Director took into account his earlier orders as also the order of the Assistant Collector dated August 20, 1964, Annexure 'P-3' whereby Jagir Singh was ordered to believer possession of the encroached upon land to the Gram Panchayat. This time he took the view that the deficiency of the petitioners was very minor and it 'P-1' which was maintained vide order dated February 13, 1976. Annexure could not be made good after a lapse of nearly 21 years from the date of repartition. As a result of this, the petition under section 42 of the Act filed by the petitioners vide order dated February 13, 1976, Annexure 'P-2'. The writ-petitioners challenged the said order by way of writ-petition in which the learned Single Judge took the view that the order dated October 10, 1974, Annexure 'P-1' tantamount to review of the earlier order dated May 23, 1974, Annexure 'P-4' which was not premissible in view of the decision in Deep Chand v. Additional Director Consolidation of Holidays, Punjab, Jullundhar,1964 PunLR 318. Consequently, the order dated October 10, 1974, Annexure 'P-1' was quashed with the observation that in event it was not necessary to formally quash order Annexure 'P-2' except to keep in regard that the apparent illegality is there.;