Back
2011 Supreme(All) 1513
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Shabihul Hasnain, J.
Saifuddin -Appellant
Versus
Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Lucknow Division, Lucknow -Respondent
Writ Petition No.2843(M/S) of 2011
Decided On : 23-05-2011
Sri Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary, Advocate, for the Petitioner. CSC, S/Sri M.A. Khan, Sr. Advocate , Santosh Srivastava, Advocate, for the Respondent.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the correction of maps under the Land Revenue Act to be done in accordance with the law and after hearing both parties, emphasizing the importance of fair play and justice in such proceedings.
Headnote:
Land Revenue Act - Correction of Map - Section 28 - Section 41 - Section 234 - Section 219
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the orders passed by the Additional Commissioner and Additional Collector regarding the correction of a map under Section 28 of the Land Revenue Act. The dispute arose from a discrepancy in the measurement of a plot of land and the subsequent order to extract land from the petitioner's plot to compensate for the deficiency.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the orders passed by the revenue authorities were arbitrary and malafide. It set aside the orders and remanded the matter back to the Collector for correction of the map in accordance with the law. The court emphasized the need for fair play and justice in the proceedings.
Issues: The issues revolved around the correct interpretation and application of the Land Revenue Act, specifically regarding the correction of maps, settlement of boundary disputes, and the authority of the Collector in such matters.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the correction of the map should be done in accordance with the law and after hearing both parties. It emphasized the importance of following the rules and procedures laid out in the Land Revenue Act and maintaining status quo until a final decision is reached.
Final Decision: The court set aside the orders, remanded the matter to the Collector for correction of the map, and directed the Collector to pass orders after hearing both parties in the interest of justice and fair play. It also ordered the maintenance of status quo with regard to possession until a final decision is reached.
2. Petitioner has challenged the orders dated 22.2.2011 passed by Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Lucknow Division, Lucknow and the order dated 30.7.2009 passed by the Additional Collector (Finance & Revenue), Lucknow (as contained in Annexure nos. 1 & 2 respectively to the writ petition).
3. Counsel for the petitioner states that on 23.1.2007 one Manohar Bhargava filed an application under Section 28 of the Land Revenue Act in the court of Additional Collector for correction of the map of Gata No. 56 Area being 2.3620 hectare. He stated that he is recorded tenure holder as Bhumidhar with transferable rights of the land of said Gata and is in possession of the entire recorded area of 2.3620 hectare. Due to mistake of Naqsha Navees the map of lesser area has been prepared, which requires correction.
4. Additional Collector called for the report from Tehsildar, Bakshi ka Talab, who has submitted his report dated 4.5.2007 stating therein that the area of gata no. 56 is recorded as 2.3620 hectare but on the measurement at the spot it has been found 2.272 hectare. He also stated that the land of gata no. 56 is being used for housing and commercial purpose and is recorded as Abadi.
5. He also informed that attached to gata no. 56 is gata no. 57 and 58 on which pucca houses have been built. On the eastern side there is Lucknow-Sitapur National Highway while on western side is gata no. 55.
6. The measurement of gata no. 55 is correct. It is not practically possible to move in the directions of gata no. 57, 58, 55 and the side which is blocked by national highway. Hence, the only side which is left is the side where plot of the petitioner is situated. This is the southern side of plot no. 56. This side is in a different village and different tehsil. The village is ‘Semra Gaurhi’ and tehsil is ‘Sadar’. It has been argued that since there is deficiency in the measurement of plot no. 56 and the only side which is left open is southern side, hence, it will be proper that the deficiency be made good by extracting the land from the plot of the petitioner, although it is in different village and different tehsil.
7. Petitioner says that the Additional Collector has passed a totally illegal order in mala fide manner. Deficiency in measurement has to be corrected by, the measurement of the same village and tehsil first and not by venturing into the land of other village and tehsil.
8. Most important fact in the case is that the application was moved under section 28 of the Land Revenue Act, which is quoted as under:
“Maintenance of map and field book.- The Collector shall in accordance with rules made under Section 234, maintain a map and field-book of each village in his district and shall cause annually, or at such longer intervals as the State Government may prescribe, to be recorded therein all changes in the boundaries of each village or field and shall correct any errors which are shown to have been made in such map or field-book.”
9. It is clear that only the map can be corrected in the process. Moreover, the petition himself says in para no. 2 of the application that he is occupying total 2.3620 hectare land which is recorded in the revenue record. He has not even prayed that his land is less than 2.3620 hectare. Even then the Additional Collector has proceeded to get the measurements done of petitioner’s plot which is not in the village of the applicant. He has failed to get the measurements done of the adjoining plots on which pucca houses have been built. This cannot be a ground for not measuring the adjoining plot no. 57 & 58. Only because some encroacher has made permanent illegal construction, his unauthorized possession cannot be justified and exempted. This will be most-illogical, malafide and arbitrary.
10. The argument of the
