IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that expunging entries from revenue records without a hearing violates the principles of natural justice.

JUDGMENT :

(Kshitij Shailendra, J.) :

Supplementary-affidavit filed today is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri Manu Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shir Azad Rai, learned counsel representing the Gaon Sabha.

3. Certain orders were passed under Section 38 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 on 24.2.2020 and 28.7.2022.

4. This Court passed the following interim order dated 6.1.2023 in Writ C No. 211 of 2023 (Vatika Grah Gram Samiti Allahabad v. Commissioner Prayagraj Division and 7 others), staying the effect and operation of the aforesaid orders as well as directing that the petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the land in dispute:

''Heard Shri Manu Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1 to 5 and Shri Azad Rai, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 6 and 7.

Counsel for the petitioner is not pressing the writ petition in respect to prayer No. C as such writ petition is being entertained in respect of prayer Nos. A &B.

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that proceeding under Section 38 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 was initiated on the basis of ex parte report and within a short span of period, the order has been passed expunging the petitioner's name from the revenue record. He further submitted that the Rule framed therein specifically prescribed that without affording any opportunity of hearing, the order cannot be passed under Section 38 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006.

He further submitted that in pursuance of the order passed under Section 38 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, proceedings have been initiated under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and the order for ejectment and damages have been passed in an arbitrary manner.

Matter requires consideration as to whether an order for expunging the entry can be passed without affording any opportunity to the recorded tenure holder.

Issue notice to respondent No. 8 returnable at an early date.

Steps be taken within 10 days.

All the respondents shall file their counter-affidavit within 6 weeks. Petitioner will file rejoinder-affidavit within two weeks thereafter.

List on 11.4.2023 before the appropriate Bench.

Until further orders of this Court, the effect and operation of the orders dated 28.7.2022 passed by Additional Commissioner Ist, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj and 24.2.2020 passed by Sub Divisional Officer shall remain stayed and the petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the land in dispute.''

5. The present writ petition has been filed with the grievance that though pursuant to the interim order dated 6.1.2023, the petitioner moved applications before the District Magistrate, Sub Divisional Magistrate as well as Tehsildar with a simple prayer that the interim order granted by this Court be entered into the revenue record, applications are pending and the said order has not been recorded in the relevant Khatauni.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that by virtue of amendment made in the Rule 27 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 with effect from 29.12.2020, RC Form 7-A has been added in the Forms.

7. By means of supplementary-affidavit, a copy of the said RC Form 7-A has been annexed. The colomn No. 10 of the said Form clearly provides that name of the Court concerned/computerized case number or order number/order date/basis of mutation shall be entered into the record of rights (Khatauni) as per Rule 27 of the Rules.

8. Prima facie, this Court finds that there is no valid reason for not making the entry of said order dated 6.1.2023 in the revenue records.

9. An interim mandamus is issued to the respondent No. 4, Tehsildar, Soraon, Prayagraj to forthwith make the entry of the said order dated 6.1.2023 in the concerned revenue records as per RC Form 7-A or to show-cause as to what is factual or legal impediment in making entry of the said order in the record of the rights, though it is mandatory as per the aforesaid amendment.

10. The cause