Judicial officers must adhere to court orders and proper procedures; exceeding jurisdiction and acting on extraneous considerations undermines legal authority.

ORDER

Later on

The case was taken up at 4 P.M. It is submitted by Shri Swapnil Ganguly, Dy. Advocate General, that because of forthcoming festival and religious gathering, the Collector, Narmadapuram could not come.

2. Considered the submissions made by Counsel for State.

3. Since, the presence of Collector was required to assist the Court as well as to explain her conduct in writing a letter directly to the Court, therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion, that Shri Ganguly, Dy. Advocate General can also explain the conduct of the Collector. Therefore, the appearance of Collector, Narmadapuram, is hereby exempted.

4. The matter was heard on merits, and also on the question of conduct of Collector, Narmadapuram in writing a letter directly to the Court as well as the allegations of passing the impugned order on account of some extraneous considerations made against Tahsildar, SeoniMalwa, Distt. Narmadapuram and Addl. Collector, Narmadapuram.

5. Before considering the conduct of the Revenue Officers, this Court think it appropriate to consider the merits of the case.

6. This Miscellaneous Petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 27/2/2024 passed by Tahsildar, Seoni Malwa, District Narmadapuram in Case No.0109/A- 27/Year 2023-24 and order dated 18/4/2024 passed by Additional Collector, Narmadapuram, District Narmadapuram in Case No.0001/Revision/2024-25.

7. By order dated 27/2/2024 the Tahsildar, Seoni Malwa, District Narmadapuram even after rejecting the objection raised by the petitioner with regard to interpretation of the order dated 25/9/2023 passed in MP No.972/2021, directed the Patwari to restore the status quo ante with regard to the mutation and also directed for proposing the partition. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Tahsildar, Seoni Malwa, District Narmadapuram, by which the Patwari has been directed to propose the partition.

8. The facts necessary for disposal of the present petition in short are that the respondents no.1 to 4 filed an application for mutation of their names. The application was allowed by the Tahsildar. However, the appeal filed by petitioner was allowed by SDO and order of mutation was set aside. The appeal filed by respondents no.1 to 4 before Additional Commissioner was dismissed. Being aggrieved by order dated 23/2/2021 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Narmadapuram Division, Narmadapuram in Case No.427/Appeal/Year- 2019-20 as well as order dated 26/12/2019 passed by the SDO, Seoni Malwa, District Hoshangabad in revenue Case No.54/Appeal/2019-20 the respondents no.1 to 4 preferred MP No.972/2021. The said had arisen out of the mutation proceedings.

9. It appears that a suit was filed by Smt. Premlata Bai, Wd/o Dr. Hari Prasad against Ajit Kumar, Pradeep Kumar, Smt. Sheela Bai and Smt. Sona Bai, which resulted in a compromise decree and by a compromise decree the title of the respective parties was declared. No decree for partition or possession was passed. Since the order of mutation, which was allowed by the Tahsildar, was set aside by the SDO and Additional Commissioner, therefore, the same was assailed by respondents no.1 to 4 by filing MP No.972/2021. The said Miscellaneous Petition was finally disposed of by this Court by the following order:-

15. Furthermore, once S.D.O., Seoni Malwa, district Hoshangabad and Additional Commissioner, Narmadapuram Division, Hoshangabad had come to a conclusion that application filed under Sections 109 and 110 of MPLRC was bad on account of non-joinder of necessary party, then the matter should have been remanded back to Tahsildar, Seoni Malwa, district Hoshangabad for a decision afresh. Accordingly, order dated 23.2.2021 passed by Additional Commissioner, Narmadapuram Division, Hoshangabad in case no.427/Appeal/Year-2019-20 as well as order dated 26.12.2019 passed by Sub- Divisional Officer, Seoni Malwa, District Hoshangabad in revenue appeal no.54/Appeal/2019-20 as well as the order da