Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. As per Rule 14 of the said rules, the intimation which a Talathi is required to give under Sub-section (2) of Section 150 of the Code should be in form IX, whereas the acknowledgment for objections received in respect of entries made under Sub-section (1) of Section 150 of the Code should be in form X. hi terms of form IX the intimation of entry in the register of mutation regarding acquisition of the right in land has to be specified in three columns of said form. The first column thereof to have serial number or date, of entry in the register, second column to disclose the nature of rights acquired and the third column to reveal survey numbers or sub-division number in which the rights have been acquired. The notice in the said form is to be issued to the persons interested or believed to be interested in the mutation. Form X is the format of acknowledgment of objections to mutation entry. Rule 16 specifies the Form III to be register of disputed cases referred to in Sub-section (3) of Section 150 of the Code. The said form is to comprise of six columns. The first column disclosing the serial numbers, second column to reveal the serial numbers in mutation register or rough copy of record of rights, the third column to refer to survey numbers and sub-division numbers, the fourth one to bear the date of receipt of objection, the fifth to contain the particulars of the dispute with names of disputing parties and the sixth column to transcribe the decision of Officer.

8. The procedure to be followed for the purpose of certifying the entry in the register of mutation as well as for deciding the objections to mutations has been prescribed under Rules 17, 18 and 19 of the said Rules. Accordingly before proceeding to decide disputes entered in the register of disputed cases as provided in Sub-section (4) of Section 150 and certifying the entries in the register of mutations, the certifying officer has to inform the Talathi to that effect in Form XI. On receipt of such information, and at least fifteen days before the date fixed for deciding disputes entered in the register of disputed cases, and for certifying entries made in the register of mutations, the Talathi is required to issue notices in Form XII to all persons likely to be interested in such disputes or entries and call upon them to be present at the place (along with their Khate-pustika) on the date and at the time fixed for deciding disputes and for certifying entries. The notice to be issued in Form XII shall disclose the entry which has been included in the register of mutations regarding the acquisition of rights in the land, specifying the serial number of such entry, nature of rights and survey number and sub-division number effected and should reveal the place, date and time of the camp of certifying officer for the purpose of certifying the said entry or for deciding the disputes entered in the register of disputed cases in respect of such entry and certifying the said entry, as the case may be and further that as the person being intimated appears to be interested the said entry should appear before the certifying officer at the said camp on the specified day and time for placing his objections to the said entry before the certifying officer, and that in case of failure to appear, it would be presumed that such person has nothing to say in the matter and the dispute about entry would be decided and entry would be certified in his absence. On the date and the place and time fixed for deciding disputes about the entry or entries, as the case may be, the certifying officer is expected to read out the mutation entries which are undisputed in the presence of the persons present. If the correctness of such entries is admitted by all the persons present, the certifying officer should record such admission in the register of mutations, and add an endorsement under his signature that the entries have been duly certified. If any error in respect of any entry entered in the register of mutations is noticed by the certifying officer, and such error is admitted by the persons interested in the entry who may be present, the certifying officer may correct that entry and certify the corrected entry as aforesaid. The certifying officer shall then hold a summary enquiry and decide each dispute entered in the register of disputed cases on the basis of possession, that is to say if a person actually holds possession under a claim of title, he shall be recorded as Occupant Class I, Occupant Class II or, as the case may be, Government lessee in the register of disputed cases. If there is a doubt as to the actual possession, the person with the strongest title shall be so recorded. He shall also record in the register of mutations, the order passed by him in respect of the mutation entry disputed, and make an endorsement under his signature to the effect that the mutation entry as modified by his order is certified by him. The order shall contain the names of the parties and witnesses and a brief summary of the evidence produced by either side, together with his findings thereon. Immediately after an entry in the register of mutations is confirmed, under Rule 17, the Talathi shall record it in ink in the record of rights and simultaneously copy out the relevant entry in the Khate-pustika also. It shall be the duty of the Circle Inspector to visit every village in his Circle and check whether the Talathi has prepared and maintained the mutation register in accordance with the provisions of the said Code and the said rules; and if it has not been so prepared or maintained, cause it to be so prepared and maintained.

10. The Sub-section (3) of Section 150 of the said Code clearly speaks of "any objection to any entry made under Sub-section (1) in the register of mutations." Sub-section (6) thereof deals with the powers of the revenue authorities to test "Entries in the register of mutations" and "if found correct or after correction" the same to "be certified ................ in such manner as may be prescribed". Thus, the objections which are to be entertained and to be dealt with under Section 150 of the said Code by such Revenue officers are in relation to the entries proposed to be made pursuant to acquisition of rights by the parties intimated under the report made by the parties or by the registering authorities to the Talathi and not in relation to the right itself of the parties in or to the immovable properties. The enquiry pursuant to such reports to the Revenue Officers, has to be restricted to the matters pertaining to the mutation of the entries in the revenue records. Such enquiry cannot travel beyond the power given to the authorities under the said provision of law. Such power being restricted to ascertain the veracity of the proposed entry, based on the document produced by the parties, the authorities cannot adjudicate upon the rights acquired by the parties to such properties in respect of which the mutation of entry is requested for. In other words the Authorities in such enquiry will have to ascertain as to whether documents produced before such authorities apparently disclose acquisition of right in favour of the applicant in a manner and of the nature claimed by him or her and not whether the applicant is in fact entitled to claim such right in or to the property. The power to adjudicate regarding such issue pertaining to right of the parties to the immovable properties vests in the Courts and the Authorities duly empowered to enquire and adjudicate about the same and not with the revenue officers acting under sections 149 and 150 of the Code and the provisions of the said Rules. In brief, therefore, the enquiry contemplated under Section 150 in relation to application for mutation of entries is to ascertain whether the document produced reveal acquisition of right stated to have been acquired in the land in respect of which mutation of entry is sought for, and does not empower such Authorities to adjudicate upon the title and rights of the parties to the immovable proprieties. In fact the entire proceedings prescribed under sections 149 and 150 of the said Code and the procedure prescribed for the same under the said Rules relate to the dispute pertaining to the mutation and certification of entries in the register depending upon the documents which are produced by the parties and not to decide about the rights of the parties to such properties.

15. In the case in hand it is not in dispute that the petitioners had produced a registered sale deed dated 15-7-1998 while requesting for entry in their favour in mutation register. The Talathi based on the said document had allowed the application filed by the petitioners and had carried out necessary mutation in the register. The Sub-Divisional Officer while dealing with the appeal against the decision on mutation of entry, assuming illegally, the jurisdiction of the authorities under the Tenancy Act sought to deal with the controversy pertaining to the tenancy claim and right under the provisions of The Bombay Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1948, sought to set aside the said decision of Tahsildar allowing the application for mutation of entry, and thereby clearly transgressed the jurisdiction of the revenue authorities available under the provisions of the said Code and the said rules in relation to disputes pertaining to the mutation of entries. Additional Divisional Commissioner by confirming the said order of the said Divisional Officer reiterated the same illegality. Apparently both the authorities have acted illegally and beyond the powers vested in them in relation to the proceedings pertaining to mutation of entries under the said Code and the said rules, and therefore the orders passed by them cannot be sustained and are liable to be quashed and set aside. At the same time it is also to be noted that in case there is any application by the respondents for mutation of entries in their favour based on any valid and lawfully registered document or any decision pronounced by any court or judicial or quasi-judicial authority competent to pronounce such decision, certainly the Authorities acting under sections 149 and 150 of the said Code cannot ignore such application nor can refuse to carry out the mutation in accordance with the declaration of right in favour of the party by virtue of such decision of the Court or the competent Authority. In case of any conflict between such entries, the parties have to settle the dispute by taking resort to the regular remedy available under appropriate statutes but the revenue authorities acting under Sections 149 and 150 of the Code cannot assume jurisdiction to decide about the rights of the parties in relation to properties, while acting under those provisions for the purpose of mutations. Albeit, the revenue authorities can certainly decide in such cases, the issue of actual possession. However, such decision would be final, subject to the decision of the civil court in that regard.