RUPAN DEOL BAJAJ, F.C. - (1.)THE present is a revision petition under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 against the order dated 1.4.1999 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeals), Patiala Division, Patiala in the matter of sanction of mutation.
(2.)THE brief facts of the case are that on the information given by Bachan Kaur d/o Darbara Singh and wife of Bachan Singh, resident of village Hassanpur, Tehsil Kharar, District Ropar, that her father Darbara Singh was not traceable for more than 20 years and could be presumed to be dead and therefore his land may be mutated in the names of his children, including the applicant. The Halqa Patwari entered the mutation No. 1684 of 'Ikhraj' for deleting the name of Darbara Singh, son of Sunder Singh, son of Pal Singh from the revenue record and substituting the name of his 5 children in his place in favour of his 2 sons, namely Rattan Singh and Ram Singh, and 3 daughters, namely Bachan Kaur, Surinder Kant and Mohinder Kaur in equal shares being the natural successors. The mutation was sanctioned by A.C. IInd Grade on 29.3.1994. Aggrieved by order of A.C. Ist Grade Kharar, Ram Singh, Rattan Singh and Surinder Kaur and others filed an appeal before the Collector and alleged that Darbara Singh was very much alive and no proof of death had been produced and the daughter Surinder Kaur stated that her father had met her a couple of years previously. After going through the record and hearing the parties, the Collector Kharar allowed the appeal and rejected the Mutation No. 1684 vide his order dated 4.9.1995.
Aggrieved by the order of the Collector, Kharar, Smt. Bachan Kaur and others filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala, which was heard and decided by the Addl. Commissioner (A), Patiala Division. After hearing the arguments of both the sides, the Addl. Commissioner vide his order dated 1.4.1999 remanded the case to the A.C. Ist Grade (SDM) Kharar with the following observations:

"I have considered the arguments put by both the parties and am of the view that before attesting the mutation the attesting officer should have satisfied himself regarding the fact of not hearing of Sh. Darbara Singh for more than thirty years. Till now, Sh. Darbara Singh has not been produced by the respondents, who allege that he is alive. Keeping the circumstances in view, I am of the considered view that the fact of non-hearing of Sh. Darbara Singh needs further investigation. So, the order of Collector, Kharar and A.C. IInd Grade Kharar dated 4.9.95 and 29.3.94 respectively are set aside. The case is remanded to A.C. Ist Grade (SDM), Kharar who will go to spot and enquire about the non-hearing of Darbara Singh. If from the spot verification it is proved that Darbara Singh had not been heard for more than seven years, mutation of Ikhrajnama of Darbara Singh should be attested. In case it is found that he was heard in last seven years, mutation will stand rejected."

(3.)STILL feeling aggrieved by the orders of Additional Commissioner, Patiala Division the petitioners have filed the present petition before this Court. I have heard the Counsel for both the parties and have also gone through the record of the lower Courts. Both the Counsel were also directed to file the written arguments in support of their contentions. The same were filed and are placed on record.