IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
YOGENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
Mohd. Yasir Ali Khan – Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh and Others – Respondents
Writ (C) No. 11344 of 2024
Decided On : 05-08-2024
(A) Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 - Sections 34, 35, and 210 - Writ petition challenging orders of mutation - The court held that an appeal under Section 35(2) is subject to the statutory remedy of revision under Section 210, as no further appeal lies against the order of the Sub Divisional Officer. (Paras 39 and 40)
(B) Jurisdiction - The court emphasized that the revisional jurisdiction under Section 210 is a supervisory power to ensure legality and propriety of subordinate revenue court orders. (Paras 31 and 32)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged the orders of the Naib Tehsildar and the Sub Divisional Magistrate regarding mutation proceedings under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code.
Findings of Court:
The court sustained the objection regarding the availability of a statutory remedy against the order of the Sub Divisional Officer.
Issues: The main issue was whether an order passed in an appeal under Section 35(2) is subject to revision under Section 210.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the absence of a second appeal does not preclude the exercise of revisional powers under Section 210.
Result: Writ petition not entertained.
JUDGMENT :
YOGENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard Sri Shreeprakash Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri J.N. Maurya, learned Chief Standing Counsel appearing alongwith Sri Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, for the State-respondents and Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent No. 5.
2. The present petition has been filed primarily seeking to assail the order dated 13.07.2023, passed by the respondent No. 3, the Naib Tehsildar, Panwadia, Tehsil Sadar, Rampur, in Case No. 35 of 2023, in proceedings under Section 34 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 [the Code] and the subsequent order dated 04.12.2023, passed by the respondent No. 2, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, Rampur, in Case No. 3689 of 2023, an appeal under Section 35(2) of the Code, whereby the earlier order has been affirmed.
3. Counsel appearing for the State respondents and also the counsel appearing for the respondent No. 5, have raised an objection with regard to the entertainability of the writ petition by pointing out that the order passed in appeal, under Section 35(2) of the Code, would be subject to the statutory remedy of a revision under Section 210 of the Code.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has sought to refute the aforesaid objection by seeking to urge that the remedy of a revision under Section 210 is available only in a situation where no appeal lies, and in the instant case since the petitioner is seeking to assail an order passed in an appeal under sub-section (2) of Section 35, the remedy of revision would not be available.
5. The question which therefore arises for consideration in the present case is as to whether an order passed in an appeal under sub-section (2) of Section 35 of the Code, would be subject to the remedy of a revision under Section 210 of the Code.
6. In order to appreciate the rival contentions, the relevant statutory provisions under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, would be required to be adverted to.
7. The provisions with regard to mutation, as contained under Sections 33, 34 and 35 of the Code, are being extracted below:
(1) Every person obtaining possession of any land by succession shall submit report of such succession to the Revenue Inspector of the circle in which the land is situate in such form as may be prescribed.
(2) On receipt of a report under sub-section (1) or on facts otherwise coming to his knowledge, the Revenue Inspector shall:
(a) if the case is not disputed, record such succession in the record of rights (Khatauni).
(b) in any other case, make such inquiry as may appear to him to be necessary and submit his report to the Tehsildar.
(3) Any person whose name has not been recorded by Revenue Inspector or who is aggrieved by the order passed by the Revenue Inspector under clause (a) or (b) of sub-section (2) may move an application before Tehsildar.
(4) The provisions of this section shall mutatis mutandis apply to every person admitted as a Bhumidhar with non-transferable rights or as an asami by the Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti in accordance with the provisions of this Code or any enactment repealed by it.
34. Duty to report in cases of transfer:
(1) Every person obtaining possession of any land by transfer, other than transfer referred to in sub-section (3) of Section 33 shall report such transfer, in the manner prescribed, to the Tehsildar of the Tahsil in which the land is situate.
Explanation - For the purposes of this section, the word transfer includes a family settlement.
(2) State Government may fix a scale of fees for getting entry recorded in the record of rights on the basis of transfer. A fee in respect of any such entry shall be payable by the person in whose favour the entry is to be made.
35. Mutation in cases of succession or transfer:
(1) On the receipt of a report under Section 33 or Section 34, or upon facts otherwise coming to his knowledge, the Tahsildar shall issue a proclamation and mak
The court ruled that an appeal under Section 35(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code is subject to revision under Section 210, emphasizing the supervisory role of the Board or Commissioner over subor....
The court established that restoration proceedings under the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 are valid despite the enactment of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, emphasizing jurisdictional competence and subs....
A revision under Section 210 of the UP Revenue Code is not maintainable unless the impugned order constitutes a 'suit or proceeding decided'.
The right to appeal or revise under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, 1950, remains intact for suits filed before the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, emphasizing that such rights are substant....
Objections to jurisdiction must be raised at the earliest opportunity, and failure to do so results in waiver; appeals under the UP Revenue Code must follow the prescribed procedures, and jurisdictio....
The right to avail the remedy of revision under Section 333 of the Act of 1950 survives the repeal of the Act of 1950 and, therefore, the revision is maintainable.
The Tehsildar's order in mutation proceedings is appealable under Section 35(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, not revisable under Section 210.
The U.P. Revenue Code's provisions regarding appeals are self-contained and govern the necessity of filing documents, overriding general procedural requirements of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the first appeal under Section 207 of the U.P. Revenue Code-2006 cannot be filed against an order passed under Section 24, and the appeal can ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.