Algoo and 2 Others v. Board of Revenue, U.P. Lko. Thru. Chairman and Others

Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1003 of 2023 Petitioner :- Algoo And 2 Others Respondent :- Board Of Revenue, U.P. Lko. Thru. Chairman And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Praveen Tripathi,Sudha Pal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶1Heard.

¶2The present petition has been filed with the following prayer:- " i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 30-06-2023 passed by learned Board of Revenue, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow (Opposite Party No.1) in Revision No. Rev/2124/2016/Mahrajganj Subhash Chandra and others Versus Aalgoo and others under section 219 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 whereby revision preferred by the private opposite parties against the remand order was allowed,"

¶3This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the order dated 30.06.2023 passed by respondent No.1-Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow in revision No.REV/2124/2016/Mahrajganj, Computerized Case No.-R20160547002124), filed under Section 219 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 (in short "Act of 1901").

¶4The impugned order dated 30.06.2023 relates to mutation proceedings.

¶5It appears from the impugned order dated 30.06.2023 that the claim of the petitioners to enter their names in revenue records based upon the 'Will' dated

03.04.2001 registered on 04.04.2001 was not accepted and in light of registered sale deed dated 24.03.2001.

¶6It also appears from record that regular suit No.378 of 2001 for cancellation of sale deed dated 24.03.2001 is pending consideration.

¶7Further, it is trite law that mutation proceedings are summary in nature and they do not decide any right or title between the parties; rather they are drawn only for fiscal purposes. Furthermore, the order passed in mutation proceedings are always subject to declaration of rights which may be sought by the parties concerned by instituting a regular suit.

¶8Section 40A of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901, (now repealed) as also Section 39 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which is applicable w.e.f. 11.02.2016, make it clear that no mutation order shall debar any person from establishing his rights in the land by means of a regular suit. Mutation of a property in revenue record does not create or extinguish title nor has it any presumptive value on title. It only enables the person in whose favour mutation is ordered to pay the land revenue. The mutation proceedings do not adjudicate the rights of the parties and orders passed in mutation proceedings are always subject to adjudication by competent Court.

¶9Considering the facts of the case, indicated in brief hereinabove particularly that the suit for cancellation of sale deed dated 24.03.2001 is pending consideration as also the law related to mutation proceeding and that the issue pertaining to claim over the property, in issue, can be adjudicated, as per law, by the competent court of jurisdiction, I am of the view that in the instant case, proper adjudication regarding claim of the respective parties is required. Accordingly, I am not inclined to entertain this petition, which is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to press the pending suit and/or institute a regular suit, if required, seeking declaration of their rights.

¶10In regard to interim relief, it is open for the petitioners to seek interim relief before the Court/Authority concerned.

¶11It is further provided that the fact/details of the suit if brought to the notice of the concerned revenue authority, then the said revenue authority shall indicate the details of suit in the revenue record. It is for the reason that the entry of details of the suit in revenue records would avoid further litigation, which can be on account of transferring the property in issue or by creating charge over the same. Order Date :- 7.11.2023 Raj High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench