Allahabad High Court
Aditya Kumar Pandey vs State Of U.P. And 34 Others on 30 September, 2024
Author: Prakash Padia
Bench: Prakash Padia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:159264 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 26859 of 2024 Petitioner :- Aditya Kumar Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 34 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhrigu Jee Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rameshwar Prasad Shukla Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
1. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the following order was passed by this Court on 18.09.2024:-
"1. Heard Sri Bhrigu Jee Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. The petitioner has preferred the present petition with the following prayers:-
(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to complete the Computerization of the revenue records of the revenue village Dumarahar Diara and Dumarahar Khurd Diara, Pargana Sikandarpur Garvi, District- Ballia forthwith.
(ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Sub Divisional Officer, Sikandarpur, Ballia respondent no.4 to registered the case of the petitioner and to proceed to decide and dispose of the same expeditious within a stipulated period as may be specified by this Hon'ble Court.
3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that a case under Section 22/24 of U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006 for demarcation has been filed by the petitioner before the respondent No.4/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sikandarpur District Ballia on 16.06.2021. The respondent No.4 has duly taken cognizance on the aforesaid case and given directions to the official concerned to register the case and sent the record for survey vide its order dated 16.06.2021, which is clear from perusal of Page 30 of the Paper-book. It is stated in paragraph 11 of the petition that the petitioner has already deposited Rs.1000/- in the Treasury for survey and submitted the receipt of the same in the Court of respondent No.4. It is argued that in spite of the fact that more than three years have already been lapsed but neither the case has been registered nor any number has been allotted from the Court of respondent No.4/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sikandarpur District Ballia. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the order dated 21.06.2021 passed by the respondent No.4 by which a direction was given to the Revenue Inspector to submit report after doing survey, copy of the order dated 21.06.2021 is appended at Page 44 of the Paper-book. It is argued that in spite of the aforesaid order, no survey whatsoever has been done nor the Revenue Inspector/Lekhpal had visited the spot due to the reason that no case number has been allotted in the matter. It is argued that unless and until, no case number is allotted, no demarcation proceedings will be initiated by the Revenue Authorities. It is argued that on 20.09.2023, Sub Divisional Magistrate (Finance and Account) Ballia wrote a letter to the Commissioner & Secretary, Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow for uploading the Village Code on the R.C.C.M.S. Portal (Revenue Court Computerized Management System). It is argued that though the aforesaid letter was written eleven months back but till date no village code has been uploaded on the aforesaid Portal, therefore, neither the case of the petitioner was registered nor any number was allotted. Hence the present petition.
4. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, Instructions dated 14.09.2024 under the signature of respondent No.4/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sikandarpur District Ballia, are placed before the Court, the same is taken on record.
5. It is admitted in paragraph 1 of the Instructions that a case under Section 22/24 of U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006 has been filed by the petitioner. It is stated in paragraph 3 of the aforesaid Instructions that since the Village Code has not been uploaded on R.C.C.M.S Portal, the case could not be registered under the U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006. It is stated in paragraph 4 that a letter dated 20.09.2023 was forwarded by the Office of District Magistrate, Ballia to Commissioner & Secretary, Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow for uploading the Village Code on the R.C.C.M.S. Portal. It is further stated in the Instructions that various reminders have also been sent to the Commissioner & Secretary, Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow in this regard by the respondent No.4/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sikandarpur District Ballia on 01.08.2024 and 09.09.2024. Since the aforesaid Village Code has not been uploaded on the aforesaid portal, no case number is allotted to the case filed by the petitioner.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7. It is pertinent here to mention that under the provisions of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, no time limit was prescribed for the proceedings initiated under the said Act. Therefore, to overcome the said deficiency in the Act, U.P. Revenue Code 2006 was enforced and in almost all the proceedings, especially which are summary in nature, for instance, proceedings under section 24, time limit was prescribed in the Act itself. For certain provisions, like appeal against the order passed under section 24, the time limit for deciding the appeal has also been provided under U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016. Consequently, as per Section 22 of the U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006 if any boundary mark lawfully erected in a Lekhpal circle is destroyed, removed or damaged, then the concerned Lekhpal shall be bound promptly to report the matter to the Naib Tahsildar and the Naib Tahsildar shall make an inquiry in respect of such report and submit his recommendation to the Sub-Divisional Officer. Further, Section 24 also states that the Sub-Divisional Officer may, on his own motion or on an application made in this behalf by a person interested, decide, by summary inquiry, any dispute regarding boundaries on the basis of existing survey maps or, where they have been revised in accordance with the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, on the basis of such maps, but if this is not possible, the boundaries shall be fixed on the basis of actual possession. Furthermore, according to Sub Section (3) of Section 24 of the Code, 2006 every proceeding under this section shall, as far as possible, be concluded by the Sub-Divisional Officer within three months from the date of the application. Section 22 and 24 of U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006 reads as follows:-
22. Destruction etc. of boundary marks. - (1) If any boundary mark lawfully erected in a Lekhpal circle is destroyed, removed or damaged, then the concerned Lekhpal shall be bound promptly to report the matter to the Naib Tahsildar.
(2) The Naib Tahsildar shall make an inquiry in respect of such report and shall submit his recommendation to the Sub-Divisional Officer.
24. Disputes regarding boundaries. - (1) The Sub-Divisional Officer may, on his own motion or on an application made in this behalf by a person interested, decide, by summary inquiry, any dispute regarding boundaries on the basis of existing survey maps or, where they have been revised in accordance with the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, on the basis of such maps, but if this is not possible, the boundaries shall be fixed on the basis of actual possession.
(2) If in the course of an inquiry into a dispute under sub-section (1), the Sub-Divisional Officer is unable to satisfy himself as to which party is in possession or if it is shown that possession has been obtained by wrongful dispossession of the lawful occupant, the Sub-Divisional Officer shall
(a) in the first case, ascertain by summary inquiry who is the person best entitled to the property, and shall put such person in possession;
(b) in the second case, put the person so dispossessed in possession, and for that purpose use or cause to be used such force as may be necessary and shall then fix the boundary accordingly.
(3) Every proceeding under this section shall, as far as possible, be concluded by the Sub- Divisional Officer within three months from the date of the application.
(4) Any person aggrieved by the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer may prefer an appeal before the Commissioner within thirty days of the date of such order. The order of the Commissioner shall, [ subject to the provisions of section 210], be final.
8. It is stated in Sub Rule 6 of Rule 22 of U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 that on receipt of the application for demarcation, on the same or next working day, the Sub-Divisional-Officer shall register the case in Revenue Court Computerized Management System (RCCMS). The Rule 22 of Rules 2016 reads as follows-
Rule 22:- Settlement of boundary dispute (1) Under section 24(1) of the Code the tenure holder dispute shall submit two copies of the application for (Section 24) settlement of boundary dispute to the sub-Divisional-Officer for one or more than one contiguous gates, and it shall contain the following particulars:-
(a) Details of Gata- Gata number, name of tenure holder, father/husband?s name of village/tehsil. If the tenure holders are more than one, then particulars of all shall be mentioned; current updated khatauni shall also be to be attached to the application.
(b) Details of contiguous Gata- Gata number, name of tenure holder, father/husband's name, name of village/ tehsil. If the tenure holders are more than one, then particulars of all shall be mentioned. Current updated khatauni shall also be attached to the application.
(2) If the khata is different in khatauni, but sub-division is not done in sazra-map, then sub-division in sazra-map shall be necessary.
(3) If boundary of any property of Gram Panchayat/State Government is adjacent to gata/gatas to be demarcated, then the Chairman, Land Management committee/Gram Pradhan and the State Government shall be made a party in the case.
(4) Only the outer boundary shall be demarcated for an application made for boundary demarcation of contiguous gates.
(5) The applicant shall deposit a fee of Rs. 1000/- in Government treasury for the demarcation of gata/attached gatas. A copy of challan receipt shall also be attached with the application form.
(6) On receipt of an application for demarcation, on the same or next working day, the Sub-Divisional-Officer shall register the case in Revenue Court Computerised Management System (RCCMS). Three copies of notices shall be issued from the computerized system and will be delivered to the Revnue Inspector through Tehsildar.
(7) The Revenue Inspector shall serve notice to the concerned tenure holder/tenure holders as mentioned in sub-rule (1), through the Lekhpal or through any other mode. In absence of the tenure holders, notice will be served to the adult family member of the tenure holder/tenure holders. The information of demarcation shall also be given to the Chairman, Land Management Committee.
(8) At the time of sending the information or before the demarcation on site, if the Revenue Inspector wants to make any other affected person, a party to the case he can do so.
(9) After fixing the date of demarcation and intimation to all the concerned tenure holders, the Revenue Inspector or any other revenue official will demarcate the land, parcel or parcels, as the case may be, During demarcation if any affected tenure holder is not a party to the case, such tenure holder shall be made a party to the case by the Revenue Inspector on the spot-And he will mention..the same in his demarcation report. Demarcation shall be completed within a month from the date of order for the same by the Sub-Divisional-Officer.
(10) The Revenue Inspector or other revenue officials shall prepare the demarcation report along with the site memo. If there are no objections to the same, then after getting the consent and signature of all the concerned parties on the demarcation report, the same shall be sent it to the Sub-Divisional-Officer through Tehsildar in a week. On receipt of the aforesaid report of the Revenue Inspector, the Sub-Divisional-officer will pass the order confirming the demarcation report.
(11) If the affected parties to the demarcation have not given their consent to the demarcation, or if there is any objection to the demarcation report, notice (s) will be issued by the Sub-Divisional-Officer to all the patties, fixing a date of hearing which shall not be beyond 15 days from the date of issuance of notice.
(12) The Sub-Divisional-Officer shall pass an order on the matter of boundary demarcation after hearing all the concerned parties. The Revenue Inspector shall comply with such order within two weeks from the date of order, and shall submit his report to theSub-Divisional-Officer.
(13) Where the boundary of gata/survey number is not recognizable due to alluvion or diluvion of land, or heavy rain, or due to damage caused by any other reason, then on the application of the Chairman of village Revenue Committee of that village, or on the report of the Revenue Inspector or Lekhpal, or on the joint application signed by all the concerned parties, the Sub-Divisional-Officer shall instruct the Revenue Inspector or Lekhpal by a general or special order in writing, that the demarcate the boundary on ground on the basis of current survey map or, where it is possible, on the basis of possession, and if there is any complaint, then on the advice of Village Revenue Committee, resolve the same on the basis of mutual consent. The Revenue or Lekhpal shall comply with such order within two weeks from the date of order, and will submit his report to the Sub-Divisional- Officer.
(14) At the time of passing order for demarcation under sub-rules (10), (13) or (14), the Sub-divisonal-Officer can direct the SHO of the concerned police station to make police force available on the spot at the time of demarcation of land, in order to maintain law and order.
(15) The Sub Divisional Officer, will try to complete the process within the stipulated time as mentioned in section 24(3) of the Code and if the process is not completed within such time then the reason for the same shall be recorded.
9. From perusal of the record, it transpires that an application for demarcation (summary proceeding) was filed by the petitioner under Section 24 of U.P.R.C. 2006 before the Revenue Authority and the prescribed fee was also paid by him, however, his case was not registered on the ground that the village where the land is situated is not mentioned/included in the RCCMS Portal and unless and until the village is mentioned in the portal, no case number will be allotted and the proceedings will not commence.
10. This Court is of the opinion that once an application is filed by the applicant for initiation of the proceedings under any section of U.P. Revenue Code, the Revenue Authority has to initiate/commence the proceedings. Non- commencement of the proceedings on the ground that the village is not mentioned in the portal amounts to unnecessary interference in the judicial process and the litigant is being deprived off from adjudication of his claim/right granted under the Act and the same amounts to violation of fundamental right guaranteed under Articles 14, 21 & 300-A of the Constitution of India, as the produce of agriculture land is means of livelihood of villagers/landholder and if his rights are not being adjudicated within the time framed in the Act, same violate Articles 21 & 300-A of the Constitution of India.
11. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the relief prayed by the petitioner in the aforesaid case should have been granted within three months but three years have already been lapsed but till date neither the case of the petitioner was registered nor any number has been allotted and the Instructions provided in this regard is totally silent that why the Village Code has not been uploaded on the R.C.C.M.S. Portal and in the absence of the same, why the further proceedings have not been started after registering the case Offline despite the specific provisions given in the U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006 which are quoted above.
12. In this view of the above, the Court is not satisfied with the Instructions provided by the respondents.
13. In this background fact, the Commissioner & Secretary, Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow is directed to go through the matter and file his personal affidavit within a period of 10 days explaining the procedure prescribed in law for registration of villages and uploading the villages on the R.C.C.M.S. Portal. He is also directed to place the data/numbers of villages of entire State which has not been registered and uploaded on R.C.C.M.S. Portal till date and explain the reasons that under what circumstances the village in question as well as other similarly situated villages, if any, have not been registered and uploaded on R.C.C.M.S. Portal
14. Put up this matter as fresh on 30.9.2024 for further hearing
15. Registry is directed to provide a copy of this order to the learned Chief Standing Counsel within 48 hours and the learned Chief Standing Counsel is directed to communicate this order to Commissioner & Secretary, Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow forthwith."
2. Pursuant to the same, personal affidavit of respondent no.2-Commissioner/Secretary, Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow has filed today in the Court. The same is taken on record.
3. It is stated in paragraph no.6 of the aforesaid affidavit that a notification dated 14.07.2005 has been published in the Official Gazette of U.P. with the title of ?????? ?????? ???????? ?? ?????? (?????????????) ????????, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Niyamawali of 2005) under section 3(1) of the regulation provides that the District Magistrate shall maintain the Record of Rights (khatauni) and section 3(2) provides that the Board of Revenue shall prepare computer software programme for maintaining the record of rights. It is also stated in paragraph no.7 that under Section 3(2) of the Niyamawali of 2005, the Board of Revenue has prepared a portal which is called Bhulekh portal and all the Record of Rights have been uploaded on that portal.
4. It is also stated in paragraph no.8 of the aforesaid affidavit that the villages which came out from Record and Survey Operation, and other villages, which were situated outside of the territory of State of U.P. and have been later included in the territory of State of U.P., a clear recommendation is required to be send from the District Magistrate of concerned District to Board of Revenue, for generating the village code and for linking the village with Bhulekh portal.
5. It is next stated in paragraph no.9 & 10 thatafter the order of this Court dated 18-09-2024, the Board of Revenue, U.P. vide letter no. W175/4-18/2022 computer cell (T.C.4) dated 20.09.2024, issued a direction to the District Magistrate Ballia, to submit a proper report along with relevant documents in respect of present matter. The District Magistrate, Ballia vide his letter dated 22.09.2024 sent a report and made a recommendation to the Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow to link the present Bhulekh of revenue village Dumrahar Diyara, Village Code 232277 and revenue village Dumrahar Khurd Diyara Village code 232278 with RCCMS portal.
6. It is further stated in the affidavit that village Dumrahar Diyara, Village Code 232277 and revenue village Dumrahar Khurd Diyara Village code 232278 has been included in the territory of State of Uttar Pradesh and a notification bearing no. 204/one- 14/2015 dated 29.04.2016 has been published by the State Government in respect of village Dumrahar Diyara, Village Code 232277 and revenue village Dumrahar Khurd Diyara Village code 232278 stating therein that the Record and Survey Operations of this village has been completed.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
8. The petitioner has preferred the present petition inter alia with the prayer to direct the respondents to complete the Computerization of the revenue records of the revenue village Dumarahar Diara and Dumarahar Khurd Diara, Pargana Sikandarpur Garvi, District Ballia. Further prayer has been made to direct the respondent no.4-Sub-Divisional Officer, Sikandarpur, Ballia to registered the case of the petitioner and decide the same expeditiously.
9. From the perusal of the record it transpires that the relief sought by the petitioner has already been granted.
10. No further orders are required to be passed with regard to prayer no.1. Insofar as the prayer no.2 is concerned.
11. In response to the same a prayer has been made by learned counsel for the petitioner to permit the petitioner to move an application under Sub-Section (3) of Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and direct the respondent no.4 to decide the same in accordance with law as provided under Sub-Section (3) of Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006
12. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance uponSub-Section (3) of Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, the same is quoted as under:-
"(3)Every proceeding under this section shall, as far as possible, be concluded by the Sub-Divisional Officer within [three months] [Substituted 'six months' by U.P. Act No. 4 of 2016]."
13. Considering the above, the present petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to move a proper application in accordance with law before the respondent no.4. The respondent no.4- Sub-Divisional Officer, Sikandarpur, Ballia is directed to register the case of the petitioner without any further delay and decide the same in accordance with law as provided Sub-Section (3) of Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
Order Date :- 30.9.2024 S.K.