- (1.) Instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for quashing the order dated 19.01.2011 (Annexure P-6) passed by respondent No.3 Commissioner, Faridkot Division, Faridkot and order dated 23.09.2014 (Annexure P-8) passed by respondent No.2 Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Punjab and for restoration of the order dated 12.11.2009 (Annexure P-4) passed by respondent No.4 Collector, Sub Division Jaitu, District Faridkot. Brief facts of the case are that respondents No.6 and 7 filed an application before the Assistant Collector Ist Grade under Section 111 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for partition of the land on the basis of prevalent jamabandi for the year 2001-02. Notice of the application was issued. Petitioners filed written statement (Annexure P-2) taking various objections, including the question of title. Assistant Collector Ist Grade, after considering the revenue record and objections raised by the parties, came to the conclusion that no question of title is involved and application for partition is maintainable and Naksha 'Ura' was called vide order dated 02.09.2008 (Annexure P-3). Against the order dated 02.09.2008 petitioners No.1 to 4 preferred an appeal before the Collector, Sub Division, Jaitu whereby order dated 02.09.2008 was set aside vide order dated 12.11.2009 (Annexure P-4) holding that question of title is involved. Against the order dated 12.11.2009 respondents No.6 and 7 preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, Faridkot Division, Faridkot, which was allowed, order dated 12.11.2009 was set aside and order dated 02.09.2008 passed by Assistant Collector Ist Grade was upheld vide order dated 19.01.2011 (Annexure P-5). Thereafter, petitioners preferred writ petition before this Court for quashing the order dated 19.01.2011 passed by Commissioner and for restoration of the order dated 12.11.2009 passed by the Collector. The writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 04.07.2013(Annexure P-7) relegating the petitioners to file revision before the Financial Commissioner.
(2.) Thereafter, petitioners preferred revision petition before the Financial Commissioner, which has been dismissed vide order dated 23.09.2014 (Annexure P-8). Hence, this writ petition.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.;