The Collector has a statutory duty to correct errors in revenue records, including maps, without discretion to refuse corrections based on administrative manuals.

JUDGMENT

Saurabh Lavania, J.

Heard Sri. Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Arun Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for opposite party no. 6 & 7 and Sri. Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned Standing Counsel.

2. In view of order proposed to be passed notice to respondents no.4 & 5 is hereby dispensed with. It is for the reason that these respondents even after appearance would not be in position to dispute the facts of the case and this process would delay the disposal of the present petition.

3. By means of this petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 19.08.2016 passed by respondent no.3/Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Faizabad (now Ayodhya). The petitioner has also assailed the order dated 25.01.2023 passed by respondent no.2/Additional Commissioner (Administration), Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya.

4. The brief facts of the case are to the effect that an application under Section 28 of U. P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 (in short the 'Act of 1901) was preferred by the petitioner for correction of map. This application was preferred in relation to Gata No./601 area 611 hec. (old No.239 M. area 0.033 hec., 455 M. area 0.74 hec. and 460 M./1 area 0.504) situated at village-Devanpara, Pargana and Tehsil-Milkipur, District-Ayodhya.

5. The aforesaid application of the petitioner was registered as Case No.128/58 (Computerized Case No.D20130423001960) under Section 28 of the Act of 1901.

6. The Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Faizabad (now Ayodhya), considering the report submitted by the concerned revenue official as also the relevant documents on record, dismissed the aforesaid case by impugned order dated 19.08.2016. The relevant portion of the same reads as under:-

7. Being aggrieved by the order dated 19.08.2016, the petitioner preferred a revision which was registered as Case no. 610/2017 (Computerized Case No.C20170400610 "Chhole Lal v. Gram Sabha) under Section 210 of U. P. Revenue Code, 2006. The revisional authority by the impugned order 25.01.2023 affirmed the order dated 19.08.2016 passed by respondent no.3. The relevant portion of the order reads as under:-

8. The law on the aforesaid aspect is crystal clear. The Collector/District Magistrate is under obligation to correct the revenue records in view of the provisions as envisaged under the Act of 1901 as also under the U. P. Revenue Code, 2006 (in short 'Code of 2006). The reference in this regard can be made to the judgment passed by this Court in Writ - C No.3818 of 2023 (Ravindra Kumar v. State of U. P. And Others).

9. This Court in the above-mentioned judgment considered Para 101 of Chakbandi Manual, Section 28 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901, relevant provisions of Code of 2006 and various pronouncements on the issue related to correction of revenue records and thereafter observed as under:

"26. Thus, from the above quoted provisions particularly the expression 'any error or omission' used in Section 30 of Code, 2006 and Rule 36(5) of Rules, 2016 as also the expression 'any error proved to have been made in the records previously prepared' indicated in Section 32 of Code, 2006 and the judgments referred above, it is crystal clear that if the Collector or Sub-Divisional Officer, as the case may be, is of the opinion that the map, field book (khasra) or record of rights (khatauni) contains 'any error or omission', he shall direct for the correction thereof. The Collector or Sub-Divisional Officer, as the case may be, is under obligation to correct 'any error or omission' in relation to map, field book (khasra) or record of rights (khatauni). As per provisions quoted above, the order of correction of map shall be passed by Collector and in the matter of other correction by Sub-Divisional Officer. Statutory provisions above referred do not say that any error or omission in the map if is of three biswas or less then the Collector can refuse to correct the map.

27. Under Section 30 of Code, 2006, the Collector is required t