[230] Naresh Kumar State of Haryana and Coram : Present: PANKAJ JAIN [1] present writ petition was filed without assailing the impugned order before the Financial Commissioner out in the Act w.e.f. 10.04.2017. The said issue was later on c Co-ordinate Bench of this under:- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-2353 Date of Decision : Naresh Kumar versus State of Haryana and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Mr. Ajeetpal S. Pakka, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Abhimanyu Antil, DAG, Haryana. **** PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) At the outset, counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition was filed without assailing the impugned order before inancial Commissioner in revision on the basis of amendment carried out in the Act w.e.f. 10.04.2017. The said issue was later on c ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP “ This Court in CWP No.10182 of 2017 had already called upon Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Advocate General, Haryana to apprise the Court about the predicament of litigation and on from his office, submitted that in case, ROR is filed in respect of the matters initiated prior to notification dated 10.04.2017, in the absence of the applicability of nomination, the same shall be applied prospectively i.e. to the new cases partition of the land, i.e. not in the matters which are pending adjudication. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2353-2018 (O&M) Date of Decision : 10.07.2026 …Petitioner ….Respondent PANKAJ JAIN Advocate Mr. Abhimanyu Antil, DAG, Haryana. ounsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition was filed without assailing the impugned order before in revision on the basis of amendment carried out in the Act w.e.f. 10.04.2017. The said issue was later on clarified by a Court in CWP-10722-2017, observing as This Court in CWP No.10182 of 2017 had already called upon Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Advocate General, Haryana to apprise the Court about the predicament of litigation and on instructions from his office, submitted that in case, ROR is filed in respect of the matters initiated prior to notification dated 10.04.2017, in the absence of the applicability of nomination, the same shall be applied prospectively i.e. to the new cases instituted seeking partition of the land, i.e. not in the matters which are pending ounsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition was filed without assailing the impugned order before in revision on the basis of amendment carried a 2017, observing as This Court in CWP No.10182 of 2017 had already called upon Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Advocate General, Haryana to apprise instructions from his office, submitted that in case, ROR is filed in respect of the matters initiated prior to notification dated 10.04.2017, in the absence of the applicability of nomination, the same shall be instituted seeking partition of the land, i.e. not in the matters which are pending RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.07.15 18:03 I agree to specified portions of this document CWP-2353-2018 (O&M) -2- Keeping in view of the aforementioned facts, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition by relegating the petitioners to file the revision petition before the Financial Commissioner. In case such revision petition is filed, the Financial Commissioner shall decide the same in accordance with law.” [2] In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed off relegating the petitioner to avail statutory remedy, in form of revision under Section 16 of the Act. [3] In case, the revision petition is filed within a period of 04 weeks from today, the petitioner shall be granted benefit of the time for which the present writ petition remained pending before this Court for the purpose of condonation of delay. [4] All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed off. (PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE 10.07.2026 ‘R. Sharma' Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.07.15 18:03 I agree to specified portions of this document