Allahabad High Court
Shailendra Pratap Singh vs Board Of Revenue And 6 Ors. on 25 July, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:148734 Court No. - 49 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 19680 of 2013 Petitioner :- Shailendra Pratap Singh Respondent :- Board Of Revenue And 6 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- M.D. Misra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C .,Azad Rai,D.D. Chauhan,Dharmendra Pratap Singh Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.
1. Heard Sri M.D. Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Dharmendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 6 and Sri S.N. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondent no. 1.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on the basis of a will deed dated 05.01.1999, the petitioner herein has moved an application for mutation of his name under Section 34 of the Land Revenue Act. The said being Mutation Case No. 99 of 2003 before the Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil- Bindki, District- Fatehpur, was decided in favour of the petitioner herein vide order dated 30.01.2003. Against the said order dated 30.01.2003, an application for restoration was filed on 04.04.2003. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein filed an objection to the said restoration application dated 04.04.2003. On 02.03.2005, the petitioner had filed objections with regard to the maintainability of the said restoration application.
3. Simultaneously, the respondent nos. 2 to 6 also filed the appeal being Appeal No. 41 of 2003 before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil- Bindki, District- Fatehpur on 04.06.2003. Vide order dated 07.10.2005, Naib Tehsildar- Malwa, Tehsil- Bindki, District- Fatehpur, allowed the restoration application and set-aside the order dated 30.01.2003 and restored the Case No. 99 of 2003. Against the order dated 07.10.2005, the petitioner herein filed a revision being Revision No. 6/L 330/05-06, Fatehpur, before the Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow, which was dismissed vide order dated 14.11.2005. Against the dismissal of the said revision petition, the petitioner herein filed Review No. 284 of 07-08, Fatehpur, before the Board of Revenue, which was admitted vide order dated 18.03.2008 and the order dated 07.10.2005, allowing the restoration application and the order dated 14.11.2005, dismissing the revision petition, was stayed. Subsequently, vide impugned order dated 23.11.2012, the review petition was dismissed against which the instant writ petition has been filed. At the time of issuing notice in the instant writ petition, this Court passed the following order on 10.04.2013 as under:
"Issue notice.
Notice on behalf of respondent no. 1 has been accepted by the office of learned Chief Standing Counsel whereas Sri D.D.Chauhan has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no. 7, therefore notice need not be served again to respondents no. 1 and 7. Issue notice to respondents no.2 to 6 through registered post returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within two weeks.
List this case on the date fixed by the office in the notice.
In the meantime, counter affidavit, if any, may be filed by the respondents.
It is made clear that pendency of the writ petition will not influence the disposal of the mutation case pending before the Naib Tehsildar and the same may be decided in accordance with law. "
4. By the aforesaid order dated 10.04.2013, it was kept open that the said mutation case is to be decided afresh by the Naib Tehsildar- Malwa, Tehsil- Bindki, District- Fatehpur. On the query made by the Court with regard to the status of the said mutation case, the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents are unable to answer the query. Similarly, on the query made by the Court with regard to the status of the Appeal No. 41 of 2003, learned counsel for the petitioner points out an application dated 28.01.2006 filed by the respondent nos. 2 to 6 before the Appellate Court wherein it is allegedly admitted by the respondent nos. 2 to 6 that the land in question has been in possession of the petitioner herein and in view of the aforesaid, they have prayed for withdrawal of the appeal by the said application. However, learned counsel for the petitioner, could not tell about any final order having been passed on said application nor he could tell about the status of the said appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the State relying upon the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 12.07.2023 passed in Writ B No. 2426 of 2023 (Daya Wati Diwan Singh Shukla, Sarasvati Vidya Mandir, Inter College and Another vs. State of U.P. And 4 Others), that it is a settled preposition of law that if there is any dispute with regard to the title and more particularly when mutation entry is sought to be made on the basis of Will, party who is claiming title/right on the basis of the Will has to approach appropriate Civil Court and get his right and only thereafter on the basis of the decision of the Civil Court, necessary mutation entry can be made. Mutation of property in revenue records neither creates nor extinguishes title to the property nor has any presumptive value on the title. Such entry are relevant only for the purpose of collecting land revenue.
6. Having heard learned counsels for both the parties and after carefully perusing the record of the case, this Court is of the view that the instant petition lacks merit and hence is liable to be dismissed on the facts of the case. If the said mutation case is still pending before Naib Tehsildar- Malwa, Tehsil- Bindki, District- Fatehpur, as in view of the order dated 10.04.2013, there is no legal impediment in deciding the said mutation case, the same shall be decided by the Naib Tehsildar- Malwa, Tehsil- Bindki, District- Fatehpur, within the period of three months from the date of production of the certified copy of this Order after affording due opportunity of hearing to all parties concerned. If the same has already been decided the consequences shall follow.
Order Date :- 25.7.2023 Shubham Arya