Indra Jeet vs Board of Revenue U.P. and Others

Rajiv Sharma, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the records.

By means of the instant writ petition, the Petitioner has assailed the order dated 3.2.2006 passed by the Board of Revenue, U.P., Allahabad in Revision No. 50 of 2004-2005 in a proceeding u/s 122-B 4(F) U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act.

Brief facts, giving rise to the instant writ petition, are that plot No. 498 area 6 decimal situated at Village Baghnath, Tehsil Hata, District Kushinagar was recorded as pond in the revenue records in the Fasli year 1356. On knowing the fact that Respondents No. 4 to 11 intended to grab the land/pond, the Petitioner filed an objection, to which, a report was called for. In pursuance thereof, tine Naib Tehsildar submitted its report, stating therein that plot No. 498 was recorded as pond. Thereafter, the Deputy Collector, vide order dated 20.2.1988, directed the tehsil authorities to expunge the entry of pond and the same be recorded in the name of Respondents Nos. 4 to 11. Feeling aggrieved, the Petitioner filed a revision before the Additional Commissioner, who, vide order dated 27.1.2005, allowed the revision and set-aside the order dated 20.2.1988,

Not being satisfied with the order dated 20.2.1988, the Respondents Nos. 4 to 11 filed second revision, bearing No. 50/2004-2005 before the Board of Revenue, Allahabad, who, vide order dated 8.7.2005, sent an Advocate Commissioner after putting embargo upon the Petitioner/ Respondent to pay a sum of Rs. 5000/- as fees as well as expenses regarding food etc. to the Advocate Commissioner. Feeling aggrieved, the Petitioner has filed a writ petition, which was numbered as CM. Writ. Petition No. 50303 of 2005, before this Court. This Court, vide order dated 20.7.2005, stayed the operation of the order dated 8.7.2005. Thereafter, the Board of Revenue, vide order dated 3.2.2006, observed that over the said plot of land, there was a pond, which has rightly been recorded but inspite of the said observations, allowed the revision and set-aside the OR-der dated 27.1.2005. Feeling aggrieved, the Petitioner has filed the instant writ petition inter alia on the grounds that Board of Revenue erred in allowing the revision filed by the Respondents Nos. 4 to 11 insofar as the entry of the pond cannot be changed and further once the revenue records clearly indicates the land in question as pond, thus, there is no justification on the part of the Board of Revenue to confer any right to any person on the ground of their illegal and unauthorized possession. Further, there is no provision under U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, which authorises the Board of Revenue to change the entry of the pond.

Learned Counsel for the contesting Respondents submits that the Petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands insofar as the pond in question was never on plot No. 498 and the revenue records are manipulated.

In order to verify the facts as to whether the pond in question was over plot No. 498 or 749, this Court, vide order dated 23.3.2011, directed the learned Standing Counsel to produce the original records. In compliance thereof, the learned Standing Counsel has produced the certified copy of the khatauni of the plot in question as well as photocopies of the same.

Since the High Court being the Court of Records, as such, certified copy of the khatauni of the plot in question is being taken on record.

On perusal of the certified copy of the Khatauni, it reflects that entries of the land in question, which has been directed to be made by the Board of Revenue in favour of the Respondent Nos. 4 to 11, is a pond since 1356 Fasli. It has also been pointed out by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that during consolidation proceedings, land in question has been recorded as pond in Forms CH 45 and 48. Thus, the revisional authorities have committed error on the face of record.

For the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 3.2.2006 passed by the Board of Revenue, U.P., Allahabad in Revision No. 50 of 2004-2005 in a proceeding u/s 122-B 4(F) U.P.Z.A, & L.R. Act is hereby set-aside and and the order dated 27.1.2005 passed by the Additional Commissioner is hereby confirmed. The District Magistrate con-cerned is directed to take appropriate decision in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, expeditiously.