JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J (Oral)

Apparently the issue, which has been raised by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, seems to be too trifle in nature, but owing to the circumstances of the proceedings, and the stage at which, it has been agitated before this Court, by virtue of the present writ petition, it deals with a very prime issue which had been sought to be addressed by the petitioner pertaining to the competence of the courts created under the Land Revenue Act, 1901, for the purposes of grant of an interim order, in a proceedings particularly which are being held at the stage of the revision under Section 219 of the Land Revenue Act, 1901.

2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has harped upon a question, that when the entire proceedings which are contemplated under the Land Revenue Act, 1901, which emanates from the principle proceedings under Section 34/35 of the Land Revenue Act, 1901, for the purposes of making the alterations of the revenue entries of rights, in the revenue records, or pertaining to the devolvement of rights over the land, by virtue of succession or by virtue of transfer, and when the ultimate order which had been passed by the subordinate courts and later when, it reaches to the stage of the appeal under Section 210 of the Land Revenue Act, 1901, or a revision under Section 219 of the Land Revenue Act, 1901. The submissions of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is that the Revisional Court, while exercising its power under Section 219 of Land Revenue Act, 1901, will have a very limited jurisdiction, to pass any interim order pertaining to the status of the property, as it is existing on the date, when the revision itself is being considered by the Revisional Court, by way of directing the parties to maintain status quo, in relation to a property which is subject matter of proceedings for mutation, under Section 34/35 of the Act of 1901.

3. The brief facts, which are involved consideration in the present writ petition, are that the predecessors in interest of the disputed property, as alleged by the petitioner, was Late Smt. Indrawati. It is contended that Late Smt. Indrawati, had purchased the property lying in “Khata No.142, Khasara No.1584", having an area of 2.26 acres, which was allegedly purchased by the predecessors in interest of the petitioner, by virtue of the registered Sale Deed dated 14.05.1987, was a land, which was lying in Village Raipur, Pargana Parwadoon, District Dehradun, and it is contended that the predecessors in interest of the petitioner in turn is said to have purchased the aforesaid property (which would be herein called the property in dispute), from its predecessors owner Shri Kunwar Chandra Bahadur.

4. It is the case of the petitioner before this Court, that Late Smt. Indrawati, after having purchased the aforesaid property by virtue of the Sale Deed dated 14.05.1987, is said to have filed an application under Sections 33/34 of the Land Revenue Act, 1901, before the competent revenue authority, praying that her name may be recorded in the revenue records. The said application, thus, filed by Late Smt. Indrawati, was numbered as Case No.283 of 1987-88, and it is not in dispute, that the said application which was preferred by Late Smt. Indrawati, which was allowed by the court of Additional Tehsildar, vide its judgment dated 17.06.1988 and its ever since passing of the said judgment dated 17.06.1988, no attempt was ever made either by Late Smt. Indrawati, or anyone claiming under her, to get her name recorded in the revenue records in accordance with the provisions contained under the Revenue Court Manual, particularly, that as provided under paragraph No.39 of the Revenue Court Manual, which castes a duty on the competent revenue authority, to record any alterations in the change of title, or a conferment of a right by succession or transfer, in the revenue records. Paragraph Nos.39, are extracted hereunder:-

“39. Orders involvi