Revenue authorities must decide the correction of land records based on the specific boundaries and descriptions provided in registered sale deeds rather than ordering a partition based on land value or road access, unless specifically directed to do so.

ORDER

1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is finally heard.

2. The instant petition was initially filed as M.P.No.4888/2019 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Later on, the same vide order dated 26.11.2024, was permitted to be converted into a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and thereafter, it has been registered as present writ petition.

3. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order dated 06.08.2019 passed bythe AdditionalCommissioner, Gwalior Division, Gwalior, whereby, the second appeal preferred by the respondents No.1 to 6 challenging the order dated 21.05.2018 passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Kolaras, District Shivpuri in Case No.96/2016-2017/Appeal has been allowed and the order dated 14.10.2016 passed by the Tahsildar, Kolaras, District Shvipuri, has been affirmed. The petition also challenges the order dated 14.10.2016 passed by the Tahsildar, Kolaras, District Shivpuri in Case No.08/A-6/2015-2016/ on an application filed by the respondents No.1 and 2.

4. The briefs facts leading to filing of the petition as pleaded are as under:

4.1. The petitioner herein vide a sale deed dated 24.05.1982 purchased 1.202 hectares of land forming part of Survey No.199/1 situated at Village Barkhedi, Tehsil Kolaras, District Shivpuri from one Riaz Mohammad. One Shri Teja s/o Shri Tarku Kushwaha also purchased 1.202 hectaresland and also forming part of Survey No.199/1 situated at Village Barkhedi, Tehsil Kolarasfrom Riaz Mohammad vide sale deed dated 24.05.1982. Subsequently, respondents No.1 and 2, i.e., Laxman and Veerbhan purchased the land from Shri Teja on 30.11.2012.

4.2. As per the case of the parties, the Survey No.199/1 was converted into two survey nos., i.e., 269 and 270 in the settlement proceedings and the name of the petitioner came to be mentioned in Survey No.270, whereas the name of Shri Teja Kushwaha was mentioned in Survey No.269. The petitioner filed a Civil Suit No.5A/2012 aggrieved by the recording of his name in Survey No.270 which was decreed vide judgment dated 30.11.2012.

4.3. The first appeal preferred by the respondents No.1 and 2 against the said judgement and decree was allowed vide judgment dated 13.12.2013 and the order passed by the trial Court was set aside. The petitioner thereafter preferred a second appeal bearing S.A.No.473/2013 before this Court against the judgment and decree dated 13.12.2013 passed by the first appellate Court which came to be disposed of with certain directions while setting aside the judgments passed by both the Courts below vide order dated 29.07.2016.

4.4. Pursuant to the order dated 29.07.2016 passed by this Court in S.A.No.473/2013, the respondents No.1 and 2 moved an application under Sections 115, 116 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (hereinafter referred as to “the MPLR Code”) seeking correction in revenue record which came to be allowed by the Tahsildar vide order dated 14.10.2016 thereby, directing for recording of the name of the petitioner as well as respondents in 1/2 share of both Survey nos., i.e., 269 and 270.

4.5. The petitioner assailed the aforesaid order passed by the Tahsildar in a first appeal before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Pargana Kolaras, District Shivpuri, who passed the order dated 21.05.2018 thereby setting aside the order dated 14.10.2016 passed by the Tahsildar and dir