G.S.SANDHU, J. - (1.) THIS is a revision petition filed under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, against the order dated 21.12.2004 passed by the Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar.
(2.) THE brief facts of this case are, that, Patwari Halqa, Nadala, Tehsil Bholath, District Kapurthala, made a proposal for correction of Jamabandi for the years 1980-81, 1985-86, 1990-91 and 1995-96 by way of Rard Badar No. 4. It was accepted by the Circle Revenue Officer on 21.12.2000 and further approved by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bholath, on 26.12.2000. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent went in appeal before the Collector, Kapurthala, who, accepted the appeal and set aside the orders dated 21.12.2000 and 26.12.2000. Still not satisfied with this order, Mann Singh (petitioner) filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar, who accepted the appeal and set aside the order of the Collector, Kapurthala, and upheld the orders dated 21.12.2000 and 26.12.2000. Still aggrieved the petitioner has filed the present revision petition on the grounds stated therein. I have heard the arguments of counsel for the petitioner. The counsel for the petitioner has mentioned that entry in favour of petitioner has been appearing in jamabandi since 1980 and that he was never heard by the SDO (Civil)-cum-SDM, Bholath, before making the correction by way of Fard Badar. He has cited ruling of ld. High Court of Punjab and Haryana appearing 1998(1) PLJ 696, wherein Hon'ble High Court has mentioned that the revenue courts has no jurisdiction to order the correction. The counsel for the respondent mentioned that, the share of petitioner was wrongly recorded in jamabandi and that it being a clerical mistake could be rectified by way of Fard Badar as per the provisions of Punjab Land Record Manual. He has further mentioned that the petitioner had filed a civil suit as well as an application for an interim injunction in respect of the said land in the civil court. His request for an interim injunction was dismissed and an appeal filed against this (dismissal) was also dismissed and the petitioner ultimately withdrew the suit.
(3.) I have considered the arguments advanced by the parties and have gone through the record of the case. Para 7.29 of the Punjab Land Record Manual provides correction of jamabandi by way of Fard Badar. In the instant case the correction of share (which had been wrongly recorded) by way of Fard Badar has not been questioned. The only issue, which has been argued, is that the Revenue Officers were not competent to effect this change. This contention would have been correct had the party (petitioner) not agitated the same issue in the civil court, where the petitioner has been unable to receive any relief. In so far as correction of share in the suit land is concerned, there is no irregularity committed by Lower Revenue Officers in making this factual correction by way of Fard Badar. Accordingly, there is no merit in this case, and the petition is dismissed. Announced. Petition dismissed.;