ORDER
V.K. Jhanji, J.
1. On 12.7.1959, Punjab Government issued notification under Section 3(2) of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) declaring Gurudwara Nadha Sahib as a Sikh Gurdwara. Subsequently, another notification under Section 5(3) of the Act was issued specifying the rights, titles or interests in properties of the Gurdwara. After the issuance of later notification, the Collector of the District under Section 26 of the Act was required to make entry in the record-of-rights, if any, of the estate in which the property is situated recording the Gurdwara as the owner of the right, title or interest in accordance with the provisions of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (xxvii of 1887). It appears that no action by the Collector was taken in pursuance of Section 26 of the Act.
2. In order to get record of rights corrected in pursuance of notification issued under Section 5(3) of the Act, the matter was taken to the Assistant Collector, Grade-1, Kalka. Vide order dated 12.7.1986, the Assistant Collector Grade-1, directed that in place of earlier entries in the column of ownership, the name of Gurdwara Nadha Sahib Patshahi Dasmi through S.G.P.C. Amritsar be registered and in the column of cultivation, the name of Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee Nadha Sahib under the control and management of S.G.P.C; Amritsar be made order dated 12.7.1986 of Assistant Controller, Grade-1 was taken in appeal by one Harkirat Singh and the appeal was dismissed on 9.12.1991 appeal against the said order was preferred by the present applicant, namely, respondent No. 5 Subsequently, after 8 years, the Assistant Collector, Grade-Ill, Panchkula vide order dated 17.1.1994 passed an order making the mutation to be disputed. In the present writ petition, order dated 17.1.1994 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Assistant Collector, Grade III is under challenge on the ground that the same is without jurisdiction inasmuch as order dated 12,7,1986 of the Assistant Collector, Grade-I having become final between the petitioner and respondent No. 5, the Assistant Collector, Grade-I, has no authority in law to review order dated 12.7.1986 and to hold the mutation to e disputed.
3. Prima facie, order dated 17.1.1994 appears to be without jurisdiction and , therefore, order dated 16.11.1999 whereby petitioner was restrained from making any construction or demolishing the original structure passed on an application made by respondent No. 4 is hereby vacated.