Revenue authorities are barred from interfering with long-standing mutation entries after an inordinate delay, and a revisional authority must set aside an order it finds legally flawed rather than confirming it.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 16.10.2024, PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TUMAKURU DISTRICT, MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD, TUMAKURU, PASSED IN CASE NO.RP-220/2022, VIDE ANNEXURE-O, THEREBY ALLOW THE REVISION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN RP NO.220/2022, VIDE ANNEXURE-M.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri. V. B. Siddaramaiah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Spoorthy Hegde. N., learned High Court Government Pleader.

2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 16.10.2024 passed by respondent No. 2-Deputy Commissioner, in Revision Petition No. 220/2022, produced at Annexure-O.

3. Sri V.B. Siddaramaiah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, contended that respondent No.2 has passed the impugned order without proper application of mind. It is submitted that, having recorded a finding that the order impugned therein, passed by respondent No.3, was not in accordance with law, he further argued that, the respondent No.2 nevertheless proceeded to dismiss the revision petition and confirm the said order. Accordingly, he sought interference by this Court.

4. Per contra, the said petition was opposed by Sri. Spoorthy Hegde. N., learned High Court Government Pleader.

5. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and upon careful examination of the material on record, it is noticed that in MR No.7/1977-78, khata was entered in favour of one Lingappa. Thereafter, the same came to be bifurcated and entered in favour of Umashankar in respect of land bearing Sy. No. 132/1 of Oorukere Village, Kasaba Hobli, Tumakuru Taluk and District. The said mutation entries were sought to be interfered with by the respondent-authorities after nearly twenty years. Such interference, after an inordinate delay, is impermissible in law.

6. In that view of the matter, having regard to the finding recorded by respondent No. 2 that the order passed by respondent No. 3 was not in accordance with law, respondent No. 2 ought to have allowed the revision petition and set aside the order dated 26.07.2022 passed by respondent No. 3. Therefore, I find considerable force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order suffers from non-application of mind.

Accordingly, the following:

ORDER

(i) The writ petition is allowed;

(ii) The order dated 16.10.2024 passed by respondent No. 2 in Revision Petition No. 220/2022, produced at Annexure-O, is hereby quashed.

(ii) Consequently, the mutation entries as they stood prior to the order passed by respondent No. 3 shall continue to remain in force, subject to the result of any civil proceedings that may be instituted or are pending between the parties in respect of the subject property.