Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the properties in dispute in both mutation proceedings are the same. In respect of the petitioner, the mutation application has been rejected despite their being a registered will on record on the ground that since the owner of the plots is a Society, the name of the 'sevayat' can only be incorporated under order of a competent court. However, the name of the respondent No.5 has been mutated by the impugned order dated 29.06.2018 on the basis of succession in respect of very same plots of land in dispute. It is contended that the finding of this Court in the interim order dated 17.11.2020 reflects that the order dated 29.6.2018 is a forged document and, therefore, the mutation order has to be set aside. It is contended that the orders in appeal and revision cannot be sustained.

11. The learned counsel has sought to point out the conduct of the petitioner in the mutation proceedings. He has stated that despite his mutation application being rejected initially, the petitioner moved yet another application dated 13.12.2018 before the District Magistrate on the administrative side in respect of the order of mutation dated 29.06.2018, which was registered as a case and proceedings were initiated that resulted in passing the order of 7.1.2019. It is stated that the petitioner has no claim whatsoever to maintain this writ petition given the fact that the mutation proceedings initiated at his behest stood concluded by means of the revisional order dated 26.2.2022 that is enclosed as Annexure No.7 to the writ petition. The learned counsel has referred to the averments made from paragraph No.17-A to 22 of the counter affidavit to contend that there is an elaborate procedure provided for uploading of orders on website of the Revenue department and, therefore, it cannot be said that the order dated 29.6.2018 was a fraudulent order as the order still appears on the website. It is contended that the mutation was also effected in the revenue records which evinces that the order was made in accordance with law. It is further contended that the order of mutation dated 29.6.2018 existing on the website of the Board can only be there if the website is accessed by the competent official duly authorized to access the website using his password.

आदेश अतः उपरोक्त विवेचना के आधार पर प्रस्तुत अपील दिनांकित 07.02.2019 स्वीकार करते हुये अवर न्यायालय का आदेश दिनांक 07.01.2019 निरस्त किया जाता है। पक्षगण पूर्व से विचाराधीन नामान्तरण वाद (अपील) में अपना-अपना तथ्य/ साक्ष्य प्रस्तुत कर अनुतोष प्राप्त कर सकते है। आदेश की प्रति के साथ अवर न्यायालय की पत्रावली वापस की जाय। वाद आवश्यक कार्यवाही अपील पत्रावली दाखिल दफ्तर की जाय।

14. Thus in the order dated 9.9.2019, the appellate court referred to the order dated 26.4.2018 passed by the Tehsildar in the mutation case instituted by the petitioner and observed that against that order of 26.4.2018, an appeal is pending in the court of the Sub-Divisional Officer and therefore, a fresh application for mutation on the basis of the will of the deceased would come under the category of a second case for mutation and therefore, the order of 7.1.2019 is illegal and therefore, from a legal point of view the appeal deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the order dated 7.1.2019 was set aside and it was directed that the parties place the facts and the evidence before the appellate court where the mutation case was pending.

(7) The Tahsildar shall make an endeavour to decide the undisputed case of mutation within the period of 45 days from the date of the registration of the case and the disputed case of mutation within the period of 90 days and if the proceeding is not concluded within such period the reason for the same shall be recorded.

(8) In all cases of mutation, the Revenue Officer passing the mutation order shall specify the precise entry which is to be made in the Record-of-Rights."

Therefore, as is evident from the provision aforesaid itself, issuance of a proclamation by the Tehsildar has no direct or immediate adverse affect on the concerned party.