CWP-24050 of 2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT M/s United Castings and others State of Punjab and others CORAM : HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present : Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Pratibha Bali, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Pawan Kumar Mr. Brijesh Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Anup Kumar Nagar, Advocate, for respondent No.4. LAPITA BANERJI Challenge in the present writ petition is to an order dated July 30, 2025 whereby the District Revenue executed an award dated to the Tehsildar Additional District Judge, Jalandhar amount of Rs. 2. A Coordinate Bench of this Court while issuing notice regarding stay dismissed the execution application for lack of jurisdiction. Therefore, the same could not be relied upon by the District Revenue Officer (Collector) to give a direction to th 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that pursuant to 24050 of 2025 (O&M) Sr. No. 106+223 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of Decision: Castings and others Versus State of Punjab and others HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Pratibha Bali, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Pawan Kumar Mutneja, Senior Advocate with Mr. Brijesh Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Anup Kumar Nagar, Advocate, for respondent No.4. *** LAPITA BANERJI, J. (Oral) Challenge in the present writ petition is to an order dated July 30, 2025 whereby the District Revenue Officer, Jalandhar (Collector), executed an award dated December 2, 2022 by giving necessar to the Tehsildar, holding that an order had been received from the Additional District Judge, Jalandhar by his office, amount of Rs.84,26,686/- against the petitioner A Coordinate Bench of this Court while issuing notice regarding stay on August 20, 2025 noted that the learned ADJ had dismissed the execution application for lack of jurisdiction. Therefore, the ould not be relied upon by the District Revenue Officer (Collector) to give a direction to the Tehsildar to recover the awarded Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner pursuant to the Rules of the Haryana Government 106+223 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-24050 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.08.2026 …Petitioners …Respondents HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mutneja, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anup Kumar Nagar, Advocate, Challenge in the present writ petition is to an order dated July Officer, Jalandhar (Collector), by giving necessary directions holding that an order had been received from the by his office, for recovery of an against the petitioners-award debtor. A Coordinate Bench of this Court while issuing notice on August 20, 2025 noted that the learned ADJ had dismissed the execution application for lack of jurisdiction. Therefore, the ould not be relied upon by the District Revenue Officer (Collector) e Tehsildar to recover the awarded amount. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits the Rules of the Haryana Government, formulated under VANDANA 2026.08.21 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-24050 of 2025 (O&M) the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development (MSMED) Act, 2006 vide Notification dated November 9, 2021 could only be executed by the Collector of the District concerned where the property of the buyer was loc recovered as arrears of land revenue but without giving an opportunity of hearing to the award debtor passed. The Collector erroneously learned ADJ to give directions to the Tehsildar very first day, 4. Learned No.4 fairly submits that there was no order passed by the learne which could be relied upon for passing Collector. It is the power under the Rules there was no adjudication by him. 5. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 6. This Court dated July 30, 2025 jurisdiction. It was incumbent upon the District Revenue Officer to consider the execution instead of relying on an order of dismissal, passe Jalandhar, for lack of 7. Accordingly, 2025 is allowed. 24050 of 2025 (O&M) Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development (MSMED) Act, vide Notification dated November 9, 2021 could only be executed by the Collector of the District concerned where the property of the buyer was located and the said amount could recovered as arrears of land revenue but without giving an opportunity of hearing to the award debtor-buyer, such directions could not have been ssed. The Collector erroneously placed reliance on the order of the ADJ to give directions to the Tehsildar , when the execution petition came up for hearing. Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of respondent fairly submits that there was no order passed by the learne ld be relied upon for passing of It is the learned District Revenue Officer the power under the Rules to adjudicate upon the execution there was no adjudication by him. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. This Court has no hesitation to hold that the impugned order July 30, 2025 is passed under an jurisdiction. It was incumbent upon the District Revenue Officer to consider the execution petition filed by the respondent No.4, instead of relying on an order of dismissal, passe Jalandhar, for lack of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the instant writ petition being allowed. The impugned order dated July 30, 2025 is set aside. Page 2 of 3 Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development (MSMED) Act, vide Notification dated November 9, 2021, even though an award could only be executed by the Collector of the District concerned where ated and the said amount could be recovered as arrears of land revenue but without giving an opportunity of such directions could not have been placed reliance on the order of the ADJ to give directions to the Tehsildar for the recovery, on the when the execution petition came up for hearing. counsel appearing on behalf of respondent fairly submits that there was no order passed by the learned ADJ of the impugned order by the learned District Revenue Officer (Collector), who had to adjudicate upon the execution petition and This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and has no hesitation to hold that the impugned order an erroneous assumption of jurisdiction. It was incumbent upon the District Revenue Officer to petition filed by the respondent No.4, himself instead of relying on an order of dismissal, passed by the learned ADJ, instant writ petition being CWP No.24050 of The impugned order dated July 30, 2025 is set aside. VANDANA 2026.08.21 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-24050 of 2025 (O&M) 8. Needless to mention that all interim orders passed in the instant writ petition st necessary steps for execution of the award dated accordance with law. 9. Connected applications if any, shall stand disposed of. August 13, 202 vandana Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable 24050 of 2025 (O&M) Needless to mention that all interim orders passed in the instant writ petition stand vacated. The award holder will be necessary steps for execution of the award dated accordance with law. Connected applications if any, shall stand disposed of. (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE , 2026 ther speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Needless to mention that all interim orders passed in the instant rd holder will be at liberty to take necessary steps for execution of the award dated December 2, 2022 in Connected applications if any, shall stand disposed of. (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE VANDANA 2026.08.21 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document