Allahabad High Court
Smt. Shanti Devi vs Board Of Revenue Up Lucknow Thru. ... on 3 September, 2019
Author: Sangeeta Chandra
Bench: Sangeeta Chandra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 25 Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 23717 of 2019 Petitioner :- Smt. Shanti Devi Respondent :- Board Of Revenue Up Lucknow Thru. Chairman & Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Raghvendra Singh,Saroj Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vinod Kumar Singh Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
(Oral) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri V.K. Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.4 and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
Sri V.K. Singh has raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petition. It has been submitted that the petitioner has impugned the order dated 10.10.2002 passed by the Naib Tehsildar, Mohan Tehsil Hasanganj, District Unnao, order dated 14.7.2016 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Administration, Lucknow Division, Lucknow and the order dated 24.6.2019 passed by the Board of Revenue in revision filed thereafter. All the orders have been passed in mutation proceedings and this Court has after considering the binding precedents held in its judgment and order dated 4.8.2017 in Writ-C no.13751 of 2005 (Awadhesh Singh vs. Additional Commissioner and others) that the writ petition should not be entertained in such matters.
Learned counsel for the respondents has also placed reliance upon a judgment rendered by me in Abdul Hameed vs. Nagar Palika Parishad, Bela, Pratapgarh and others, 2019 (144) RD 120.
It has been submitted on the basis of such judgments that the writ petitions are not maintainable when mutation proceedings are challenged unless the Court finds that the order impugned is completely without jurisdiction or it creates a right against the statutory provisions of law and against the rights already settled by the competent court of law in earlier litigation.
This Court has considered the orders impugned. It finds that the two rival claimants had come to claim the property of one widow Smt. Chetna on the basis of Will allegedly made out in favour of two rival claimants. Since mutation proceedings are summary proceedings, no right can be claimed on the basis of such mutation proceedings, except the liability to pay taxes to the government.
This Court, therefore, disposes of the writ petition giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the basis of the mutation orders that is the alleged Will by seeking a declaration from a competent civil court.
Order Date :- 3.9.2019 Sachin