Pushpa Adwani And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

S.K. Mishra, J

In this Intra-Court appeal, the appellants-writ petitioners have assailed the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No.

548 of 2021 dated 09.09.2021, whereby the Writ Petition of the appellants-writ petitioners was dismissed. It is brought to our notice that the

appellants-writ petitioners have prayed for quashing of the notification dated 11.02.2021 issued by the Revenue Department, State of Uttarakhand,

Annexure No. 9, whereby the record and survey operations, under the Uttar Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1901 (hereinafter referred to as “the

Actâ€​), was brought to an end.

It is the case of the appellants-writ petitioners that their application/objection is pending before the Assistant Record Officer. Therefore, it is

submitted that closure of the record and survey operations will cause prejudice to him.

The learned Single Judge has taken into consideration the provision of Section 105 of the Act. Section 105 of the Act reads as follows :-

“105. Applications and proceedings pending before Record or Settlement Officer when operations are closed.-When the record or

settlement operations are closed by notification under Section 48 or Section 59, all applications and proceedings then pending before the

Record or Settlement Officer shall be transferred to the Collector, who shall have the powers of a Record or Settlement Officer for the

disposal thereof.â€​

It is apparent from the aforesaid provision that even after closure of the survey and record operations, the pending applications, disputes and

appeals shall be considered by the competent Revenue Court, to which the cases are transferred. Hence, the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ

Petition.

However, bringing to the notice of this Court the provision of Section 57 of the Act, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellants-writ petitioners

would argue that in case the record and survey operations is brought to an end, then a presumption would be drawn against them, and that would

cause prejudice to them. However, it is appropriate to take note of Section 57 of the Act, which reads as under :-

“ 57. Presumption as to entries. - All entries in the record-of-rights prepared in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter shall be

presumed to be true until the contrary is proved; and all decisions under this Chapter in cases of dispute shall, subject to the provisions of

sub-section (3) of Section 40, be binding on all Revenue Courts in respect of the subject-matter of such disputes; but no such entry or decision

shall affect the right of any person to claim and establish in the Civil Court any interest in land which requires to be recorded in the registers

prescribed by Section 32.â€​

A plain reading of the aforesaid provision clearly reveals that any entry made in the record-of-rights prepared in accordance with the provisions of

this Chapter shall be presumed to be true until the contrary is proved. However, this provision will not be applicable to any pending proceedings in

which any particular records or entries have been challenged consequent upon closure of the survey and records operation is transferred under

Section 105 of the Act.

Hence, we are not inclined to admit this Special Appeal. But, we further observe that any title, record of rights, or records (relating to objections of

the appellants) in the revenue records shall not be presumed to be genuine and correct under Section 57 of the Act till the pending application/objection

of the appellants-writ petitioners is decided by the competent Revenue Court.

With the aforesaid observations, the Special Appeal is, hereby, disposed of.

Urgent certified copy of this judgment be granted to the parties on proper application.