135 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-27331-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.09.2025 Ram Singh (Deceased) Through LRs. and others ..... Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present: Mr. G.C. Shahpuri, Advocate for the petitioners. ***** HARSH BUNGER J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India inter alia seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for setting aside order dated 25.08.2023 (Annexure P-9) passed by the learned Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Saraswati Nagar, Yamuna Nagar, whereby the partition application submitted by respondent No.4- Sahib Singh has been accepted. 1.1 A further prayer has been made for setting aside the Sanad Takseem (Annexure P-10) and also the order dated 15.07.2025 (Annexure P-12) passed by the learned Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala. 2. Briefly, respondent No.4- Sahib Singh sought partition of joint land comprised in khewat/khatoni No.491/567, khewat/khatoni No.265/301, khewat/khatoni No.492/568 and khewat/khatoni No.86/95 (as per jamabandi for the year 2012-13), situated at Village Talakaur, Sub Tehsil Saraswati HIMANI GUPTA 2025.09.17 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar. 2.1 It appears that in the aforesaid partition proceedings, the petitioners appeared and also submitted their reply(ies). During the pendency of the partition proceedings, respondent No.4- Sahib Singh filed an application for clubbing of all the aforesaid khewats, which was accepted by the learned Assistant Collector and thereafter, a joint mode of partition was prepared and sanctioned by the learned Assistant Collector on 12.05.2023. 2.2 Apparently, the partition proceedings culminated with the passing of final order of partition dated 25.08.2023 (Annexure P-9) and drawing of Sanad Takseem (instrument of partition) (Annexure P-10). Thereafter, it appears that even the possession proceedings were carried out. 2.3 The petitioners challenged the partition proceedings/Sanad Takseem by filing a revision before the learned Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala, however, the same was dismissed vide order dated 15.07.2025 (Annexure P-12). 3. In the aforementioned circumstances, the petitioners have filed the instant writ petition before this Court for seeking the relief(s) as noticed hereinabove. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has primarily raised two arguments; firstly that the learned Assistant Collector has wrongly allowed clubbing of khewats and secondly that the petitioners have been allotted land of inferior quality and that respondent No.4- Sahib Singh has been allocated land comprised in Rectangle No.69 Killa No.13/1 (6-10), whereas he was only entitled to 6 kanals of land out of the said khasra numbers. 5. I have considered both the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners, however, I find no merit in the same. 6. Firstly, it is not disputed that the petitioners had appeared in the HIMANI GUPTA 2025.09.17 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document partition proceedings and participated therein. When respondent No.4- Sahib Singh applied for clubbing of khewats, concededly no objection was filed by the petitioners nor the order, whereby the clubbing of khewats was permitted, was ever challenged by the petitioners. 7. That apart, subsequently a joint mode of partition was prepared in respect of all the khewats under partition, even the said order has not been challenged by the petitioners. The things did not stop here. Subsequently, on the basis of the sanctioned mode of partition, which was prepared for all the khewats jointly, Naksha ‘Bey’ was received from the field staff and even on the proposed Naksha ‘Bey’, the petitioners have not submitted any objections. Accordingly, the partition proceedings continued and ultimately the final order of partition came to be passed by learned Assistant Collector on 25.08.2023 (Annexure P-9) which was followed by the drawing of Sanad Takseem (Annexure P-10). 8. Once the petitioners have failed to raise objections at the relevant stages of the partition proceedings and allowed the partition proceedings to continue and concluded, now after the final partition has been carried out with the drawing of Sanad Takseem (instrument of partition), and even the possession proceedings have been carried out, at this stage, the petitioners cannot be permitted to reopen the entire partition proceedings by raising objections that they were not afforded an opportunity of hearing before the sanctioning of joint mode of partition for all the khewats and/or the manner in which the areas have been allocated to the respective co-sharers. 9. It is not the case of the petitioners that they have been allocated land less than their entitlement. 10. Considering the totality of circumstances, I find no compelling reason to interfere in the impugned orders and finding no merit in the instant HIMANI GUPTA 2025.09.17 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document writ petition, the same is accordingly dismissed. 11. All the pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed. 15.09.2025 (HARSH BUNGER) Himani JUDGE 1. Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable : Yes/No HIMANI GUPTA 2025.09.17 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document