AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
 A.S. Oka, J
There is a common issue involved in these three petitions. The issue is about the manner in which revision applications and appeals under the
Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (for short “the said Codeâ€) are being dealt with by the State Government. On the basis of the
submissions made across the bar, the issues/ grievances which are the subject matter these three petitions can be summarized as under:
(a) The appeals/ revision applications which are maintainable before the State Government under the provisions of the said Code and, especially the
applications for interim relief therein remain pending for inordinately long time;
(b) As the applications for interim relief are not heard for considerably long time, the appellants/ applicants are forced to approach this Court by
invoking a remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing necessary directions to the appellate/ revisional authority;
(c) The parties or their advocates do not get an opportunity to mention their matters before the appellate/ revisional authority for grant of urgent
interim reliefs and that the applications are heard as and when the appellate/revisional authorities are available;
 (d) There is no date fixed for pronouncement of judgments. Invariably, there is a delay in communicating the judgments and/or orders. There is no
opportunity to the unsuccessful party to apply for continuation of interim relief to enable him to effectively challenge the judgment and order .
In Writ Petition (St.) No.11253/2017, the grievance of the petitioner is that an appeal preferred by the petitioner in March 2016 is not being heard by
the State Government which is the appellate authority and even applications for interim relief are not being heard. In Writ Petition (St.)
No.11254/2017, the grievance is identical.
Writ Petition No.7504/2015 was disposed of by the order dated 6th August 2015 by a Division Bench of this Court directing the State Government
to decide the revision application preferred by the petitioners by the end of the year 2015. As the said order was not complied with, a contempt petition
was filed therein which was disposed of by the order dated 8th September 2016 by another Division Bench of this Court by which time to dispose of
the revision was extended by a period of two months. The grievance in Civil Application No.2041/2018 is that the said revision application is not being
disposed of notwithstanding the two orders passed by this Court. We must note that in this civil application, a communication dated 24th September
2018 addressed by the Desk Officer of the Revenue and Forest Department to the Assistant Government Pleader is filed which records that the
revision application was disposed of by the judgment and order dated 23rd August 2017. A regret has been expressed in the said letter that the revision
application could not be disposed of within the time fixed under the order dated 8th September 2016. It is contended that the said order was not served
to the applicant. Such grievances arise as after the appeals and revision applications under the said Code are heard by the State Government, the date
for pronouncement of judgment is never communicated to the parties.
We have extensively heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties as well as the learned AGP for the State. Our attention is invited to the
judgment and order dated 24th March 2009 in Writ Petition No.4101/2007 (Smt.Savitri Chandrakesh Pal v. State of Maharashtra and others) wherein
the procedure for dealing with the appeals by the State Government has been laid down. Our attention is also invited to the judgment and order dated
17th February 2011 in Writ Petition No.9708/2010 (Smt.Chaya Jagan Kale v. The State of Maharashtra and others) which again lays down guidelines.
The learned AGP has placed on record a copy of the Government Resolution dated 17th December 2015 issued by the Revenue and Forest
Department by which certain guidelines have been laid down for dealing with the appeals and revisions filed before the State Government. It provides
for maintenance of a register. It lays down timeÂline for disposal of interim applications in appeals. The learned AGP has also placed on record a
draft notification/ Government Resolution proposed to be issued by the State Government dealing with the issue. He urged that the State Government
is willing to issue a Government Resolution in terms of the said draft.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners have also invited our attention to various issues concerning the manner in which such appeals and
revision applications are being dealt with. It is pointed out that as a matter of course, practically in every case where there is an urgency, as the State
Government as the appellate/ revisional authority under the said Code is not giving priority to the hearing of the interim applications, the appellants/
applicants are forced to approach Writ Court.
We have considered the submissions. Section 247 of the said Code generally provides for a remedy of two appeals against the orders passed in the
proceedings under the said Code. Section 248 is relevant which lays down as to which appeal lies to the State Government. Section 248 reads thus:
“248. Appeal when to lie to State Government:
An appeal shall lie to the State Government from any decision or order passed by a Commissioner or by a Settlement Commissioner or by a Director
of Land Records, or by a Deputy Director of Land Records invested with powers of Director of Land Records, except in the case of any decision or
order passed by such officer on appeal from a decision or order itself recorded in appeal by any officer sub ordinate to him.â€
Section 250 of the said Code lays down the period of limitation and section 251 confers power to condone the delay. Section 254 deals with
accompaniments of appeals. SubÂsection (2) of section 256 confers power on the appellate authority to stay the execution of the orders appealed
against. The proviso to subÂsection (2) lays down the conditions on which an order involving payment of amount to the State Government should be
stayed.
Section 257 and, in particular subÂsection (1) thereof confers power on the State Government to entertain revision applications against certain
orders. Section 257 reads thus:
“257. Power of State Government and of certain revenue and survey officers to call for and examine records and proceedings of subordinate
officers.
(1) The State Government and any revenue or survey officer, not inferior in rank to an Assistant or Deputy Collector or a Superintendent of Land
Records, in their respective departments, may call for and examine the record of any inquiry or the proceedings of any subordinate revenue or survey
officer, for the purpose of satisfying itself or himself, as the case may be, as to the legality or propriety of any decision or order passed, and as to the
regularity of the proceedings of such officer.
Provided that, no such proceedings under this sub section or subÂsection (2) shall be initiated by any revenue or survey officer after expiry of a
period of five years from the date of decision or order of the subÂordinate officer except with the previous permission of the State Government.
(2) A Tahsildar, a NaibÂTahsildar, and a District Inspector of Land Records may in the same manner call for and examine the proceedings of any
officer sub ordinate to them in any matter in which neither a formal nor a summary inquiry has been held.
(3) If in any case, it shall appear to the State Government, or to any officer referred to in subÂsection (1) or subÂsection (2) that any decision or
order or proceedings so called for should be modified, annulled, or reversed, it or he may pass such order thereon as it or he deems fit:
Provided that, any proceedings brought before any revenue or survey officer shall be disposed of within a period of one year from the date on which
such proceeding is filed;
Provided further that, any proceeding pending under this section, before any revenue or survey officer on the date of commencement of the
Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (Amendment) Act, 2016, shall be disposed of within a period of one year from the date of such commencement:
Provided also that, where the revisional authority fails to dispose of any such proceeding within the period specified in this subÂsection, the State
Government alone shall be competent to grant such further extension of time for disposing of any such proceeding as it may deem fit, after recording
reasons therefor in writing.
Provided also that, in exceptional circumstances, for reasons to be recorded in writing, the period for disposing of any such proceeding may be
extended further by six months by the State Government or an officer not below the rank of Collector designated in this behalf who is superior to the
revisional authority:
Provided also that, if the revisional authority fails to dispose of any such proceedings within the period specified in subÂsection (3), without sufficient
cause, then he shall be liable for disciplinary action in accordance with the concerned disciplinary rules applicable to him:
Provided also that, the State Government or such officer shall not vary or reverse any order affecting any question of right between private persons
without having given to the parties interested notice to appear and to be heard in support of such order:
Provided also that, an Assistant or Deputy Collector shall not himself pass such order in any matter in which a formal inquiry has been held, but shall
submit the record with his opinion to the Collector, who shall pass such order thereon as he may deem fit.
(4) Revision of an order issued under subÂsection (1) or
(2) by any officer referred to therein shall not be permissible; but it shall be lawful for the State Government alone to modify, annul or reverse any
such order issued under subÂsection (1) or (2).â€
SubÂsection (3) of section 256 confers power on the revisional authority to stay the execution of the order against which a revision is entertained. The
said provision is similar to the provision of subÂsection (2) of section 256 which confers power on the appellate authority to grant stay.
The provisions of the said Code will show that the State Government as an appellate authority/ revisional authority under the said Code is
empowered to decide a lis between the parties. Hence, the State Government exercises quasiÂjudicial powers while dealing with appeals/ revisions.
The appellate and revisional jurisdiction is conferred on the State to deal with quasi judicial orders passed by the authorities under the said Code. In
many cases, the State Government is required to decide even an issue of title to a land. One such category of cases is of revisions arising from orders
passed in the proceedings under section 20 of the said Code. In exercise of the Rule making power under section 328 of the said Code, the
Maharashtra Land Revenue (Appeals, Revision and Review) Rules, 1967 (for short “the said Rules of 1967â€) have been framed. Rules 3 to 5 are
the only material Rules which read thus:
“3. Form and contents of appeal and application:Â
(1) Every appeal or an application for revision or review under Chapter XIII of the Code shall be made in the form of a petition addressed to the
appropriate authority and shall be drawn up in concise and intelligible language. It shall bear the signature or thumb impression of the appellant or, as
the case may be, the applicant, or his duly authorised agent and shall bear a CourtÂfee stamp of such value as is provided therefor in the Bombay
CourtÂFees Act, 1959.
(2) The appeal or application shall contain the following particulars, that is to say;Â
 (i) the name of the appellant or the applicant, as the case may be;
(ii) his father's name;
(iii) his occupation and place of residence and address, and
(iv) the name and address of the writer, if any, of the appellant or applicant.
(3) The appeal or application shall also contain a brief and statement of facts on which the appellant or applicant relies in support of his appeal or
application, and the grounds of his objection to the order or decision against which the appeal or application is made.
Presentation of appeal and application;Â
(1) Appeals or applications for revision or review may either be presented to the appropriate authority in person or be forwarded to it by post.
(2) Where an appeal or application is sent by post, the postage on the cover containing it must invariably be fully preÂpaid.
Rejection of appeals and applications : Non compliance with the provisions of the preceding rules in any material respect may render an appeal
or application liable to be rejected without enquiry into its merits.â€
Now, we turn to the decision wherein the procedural guidelines have been laid down in the case of Smt.Savitri Chandrakesh Pal (supra). The
learned single Judge of this Court in paragraphsÂ17 to 19 has laid down the following guidelines:
“Procedural Guidelines for QuasiÂJudicial Authority :
This Court in exercise of powers conferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India prescribes the following procedure to be
adopted by quasiÂjudicial authorities including the Ministers, Secretaries, officials and litigants while hearing and determining appeals, revisions, review
applications and interim applications etc.:
(1) Memo of appeal or revision, review and or any application shall specifically mention under which enactment and/or under what provisions of law
the said appeal/ review/ revision or application is filed.
(2) The appellant/ applicant shall give a synopsis of concise dates and events along with the memo of appeal or revision.
(3) The appeal, revision and/or application shall be filed within a period stipulated under the law governing the subject from the receipt of the order/
decision which is impugned in the above matter. In the event of delay, it should only be entertained along with application for condonation of delay.
(4) At the time of presentation of the appeal, review or revision, the applicant shall, if, filed in person, establish his identity by necessary documents or
he shall file proceedings through authorised agent, and/or advocate.
(5) The application shall be accompanied by sufficient copies for every opponents/ respondents and also supply 2 extra copies for the authorities. (6)
For issuance of summons to the opponents/ respondents, court fees/ postal stamps of sufficient amount shall be affixed on the application form/ memo
of appeal or revision as the case may be.
(7) In addition to service through the authority, appellant/ applicant may separately send the additional copies to each of the opponents/ respondents by
registered post acknowledgement due and may file affidavit of service along with evidence of despatch. The postal and acknowledgment alone should
be treated as evidence of service in the event of service through postal authority.
(8) In the event of an urgency of obtaining an interim relief like stay, injunction/ other interim order or direction or statusÂquo etc, a specific case of
urgency should be made out in the application, which the authority may entertain subject to the brief reasons recorded. The said order shall also be
communicated immediately to all the effected persons. The proof of timely despatch of the Registered A.D.s and all the acknowledgments shall be
separately maintained.
(9) If there is real urgency, the concerned authority may grant ex parte interim/ adÂinterim relief for the reasons to be recorded for a particular period
only within which time the service on the concerned opponents/ respondents shall be effected. Appellant/ applicant should file affidavit of service, if
such party requires early hearing or continuation for interim relief or of an appeal, revision or review.
(10) The competent authority shall also communicate the next date of hearing to all the parties along with time and place and shall, as far as possible,
adhere to the said date and time of hearing.
(11) The concerned official in every department should be asked to remain present at the time of hearing and assist the concerned authority in the
matter.
(12) Reasonable sufficient time be provided between the date of receipt of notice and the actual date of hearing. If any party is unable to remain
present at the time of hearing for a sufficient cause, one further opportunity should be given to such party for hearing.
(13) The authority hearing quasiÂjudicial matters shall duly fix a date, time and venue for such hearing. Such authority shall refrain from interacting
with third party during the course of hearing either in person or on phone and shall not do any act which would tend to affect or prejudice fair hearing.
(14) A speaking order shall be passed by the authority hearing the matter as early as possible after the hearing is concluded and, as far as possible,
within a period of four to eight weeks from the conclusion of the hearing, on the basis of the record before it as well as the submissions made at the
hearing. The order must contain reasons in support of the order.
(15) The authority shall not receive information or documents after the hearing is concluded and/or shall not pass the speaking order on the basis of
such documents and/or information unless such material is brought to the notice of the parties to the proceedings following rules of natural justice.
(16) The order passed by the quasiÂjudicial authority on the hearing shall be forthwith communicated to all the parties by Registered A.D.
(17) No application or request or prayer from the political worker, Member of Legislative Assembly, Member of Parliament or third party shall be
entertained in the quasi judicial proceedings unless such person is a party respondent or intervenor in the proceedings.
(18) The order pronounced shall be communicated to the parties immediately.
(19) Record of hearing shall be meticulously maintained in a separate Roznama.
(20) The notings of concerned officials/ law assistants to assist the authority shall include only content of facts and legal provisions along with case
laws, if any.
(21) The notings made by the law officials/ concerned officials shall not be in the form of order.
In addition to the above guidelines, the quasiÂjudicial authorities shall also follow the parameters laid down by this Court in the case of Lokmanya
Nagar Priyadarshini v. State of Maharashtra, 2007 (1) Bom.C.R. 929, which read as under:
PARAMETERS
(a) While considering the stay application, the authority concerned should at least briefly set out case of the applicant/ appellant, as the case may be.
(b) While granting the ex parte order, it should be granted for a shorted duration with short notice to the opponent(s).
(c) If ex parte stay is to be granted, then the authority passing the order should specify the reasons in short for grant of ex parte order.
(d) The Authority passing the order should,
(i) record its findings as to whether or not a prima facie case is made out with short reasons in support of the finding;
(ii) record its finding as to in whose favour balance of convenience lies, and
(iii) record its finding whether nonÂgrant of interim relief would cause any prejudice to the person seeking interim relief.
(e) The ingredients at (d) (i) to (iii) should be discussed and positive finding should be recorded while granting or refusing to grant interim relief.
The aforesaid procedural guidelines shall also be applicable to all quasiÂjudicial authorities in respect of hearing of appeals, revisions, review
applications/ interlocutory applications, where there are no specific rules prescribed for hearing under a specific law like Maharashtra CoÂoperative
Societies Act, Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, etc.†                   (emphasis added)
The same guidelines have been quoted with approval in paragraphÂ23 by the Division Bench of this Court in its decision in the case of Smt.Chaya
Jagan Kale (supra) which read thus:
“23. During the course of hearing, we have perused the original record. We are disturbed to note that despite one of us (V.C.Daga J.) issuing the
procedural Guidelines for quasi judicial authority in Writ Petition No.4101 of 2007 in the judgment dated 24.3.2009, the authorities are not following
the said Guidelines. We approve and reiterate the said Guidelines which have been laid down in Paragraph No.17 of that judgment. For ready
reference they are reproduced herein below: ….. …..â€
It appears from the documents placed on record by the learned AGP and, especially the order dated 7th July 2016 passed by the Hon'ble Chief
Minister that the appeals/ revisions under the said Code which are maintainable before the State Government are being heard by the Hon'ble Cabinet
Minister of the Revenue Department and the Hon'ble Minister for State of the Revenue Department. It is a common ground taken in several writ
petitions filed in this Court that for various reasons, the Hon'ble Ministers empowered to exercise the powers are not regularly available to deal with
urgent prayers for grant of adÂinterim or interim reliefs. Therefore, the State Government will have to examine whether the appellate/ revisional
powers of the State can be conferred on some senior Secretaries.
In many cases, the appeals/ revisions applications arise out of disputes concerning agricultural lands having small areas. Small time farmers are the
litigants in such cases. There are appeals/ revisions arising out of partition proceedings under section 85 of the said Code wherein the parties are
litigating for years. In many cases and especially in the cases of farmers, the pendency of proceedings may affect their right to earn livelihood. Right
to speedy justice is enshrined in our Constitution. There are several cases where there is an undue delay in even taking up the applications for adÂ‐
interim reliefs in appeals/ revisions for hearing. Such delays may defeat the very object of providing the remedy of appeal/ revision. Therefore, it is the
duty of the State to ensure that the appellant or applicant in appeal and/or revision application, as the case may be, gets an opportunity to present his
case before the appellate/ revisional authority for grant of adÂinterim relief immediately after filing of appeals/ revisions. In any event, a litigant is
entitled to make submission before the appellate/ revisional authority that his case should be taken up for consideration immediately as there is an
urgency to grant adÂinterim/ interim relief. The draft Government Resolution of October 2018 which is placed on record by the learned AGP provides
for nominating the Officers who will decide when the urgent applications in appeals/ revision applications  will be heard by the appellate/Â
revisional authorities. This provision in the proposed Government Resolution implies that a litigant will never get a chance to mention his case
before the appellate or revisional authority so that he can make out a case for urgency. Not making available an opportunity to the litigants to move the
appellate/ revisional authority even for praying that the application for interim relief should be taken up immediately virtually amounts to denial of
justice which cannot be countenanced by a Writ Court. In the case of Noor Mohammed v. Jethanand (2013) 5SCC 202, the Apex Court held thus:
“28. In a democratic setÂup, intrinsic and embedded faith in the adjudicatory system is of seminal and pivotal concern. Delay gradually declines the
citizenry faith in the system. It is the faith and faith alone that keeps the system alive. It provides oxygen constantly. Fragmentation of faith has the
effectÂpotentiality to bring in a state of cataclysm where justice may become a casualty. A litigant expects a reasoned verdict from a temperate
Judge but does not intend to and, rightly so, to guillotine much of time at the altar of reasons. Timely delivery of justice keeps the faith ingrained and
establishes the sustained stability.
Access to speedy justice is regarded as a human right which is deeply rooted in the foundational concept of democracy and such a right is not only the
creation of law but also a natural right. This right can be fully ripened by the requisite commitment of all concerned with the system. It cannot be
regarded as a facet of Utopianism because such a thought is likely to make the right a mirage losing the centrality of purpose. Therefore, whoever has
a role to play in the justice dispensation system cannot be allowed to remotely conceive of a casual approach.â€
                       (Emphasis added)
If appellant or applicant, as the case may be, are not even permitted to move the appellate/revisional authority for hearing of the prayer for adÂ‐
interim relief, it will amount to denial of the access to justice. It will infringe his right of securing speedy justice. Therefore, it is necessary for the State
to make available the said opportunity to the litigants. On many occasions, the Hon'ble Ministers exercising appellate/ revisional powers are not
available. The State will have to consider of authorizing senior Secretaries to hear the prayers for interim/ adÂinterim reliefs in absence of Hon'ble
Ministers. The State Government must ensure that the appellate/ revisional authority is available at a fixed time of every working day so that the
litigants can mention their matters.
Another difficulty expressed across the bar is that the dates for pronouncement of judgments are never communicated to the litigants in appeals/
revisions where the judgment is reserved. As a result, in some cases, the successful party gets intimation of the judgment/order before the
unsuccessful party which prevents the unsuccessful party from effectively challenging the decision. Moreover, there is nothing placed on record to
show that the judgments in appeals and/or revision applications are being immediately uploaded on a dedicated website after the same are pronounced.
If the judgments and orders as well as interim orders are uploaded, it will bring about a lot of transparency. Moreover, the litigants will not be required
to apply for certified copies. Uploading of orders on website to enable the litigants to download copies thereof is an essential part of “ease of doing
businessâ€. If the judgments and orders are uploaded, the same become immediately available to the litigants. In the era of computers and internet,
this will be a very minimum and legitimate expectation of litigants. This is also an integral part of the access to justice.
In many cases, we have come across, the revision applications and/or appeals filed with the State Government are not even numbered. There are
no data entries made on the dedicated website of filing of appeals/ revisions. It is necessary to ensure that the appeals/ revisions filed before the State
Government are numbered in a similar manner in which the proceedings are numbered in the Court of law. It will be appropriate if data entries are
made of the proceedings filed on the dedicated website of the State Government so that the data becomes available to the litigants. By making
available such data along with copies of the judgment and orders on public domain, a litigant is able to monitor the progress of his case while sitting at
home. Not providing such elementary facilities may amount to denial of effective access to justice.
Thus, we propose to issue appropriate directions in addition to the directions already issued by the learned single Judge in the case of Smt.Savitri
Chandrakesh Pal (supra) which are affirmed by the Division Bench in the case of Smt.Chaya Jagan Kale (supra).
Now, coming to the facts of the individual cases, Civil Application No.2041/2015 is taken out by the petitioner in Writ Petition No.7504/2015
inviting attention of the Court to the order dated 6th August 2015 passed in the writ petition by which revision application subject matter of writ petition
was ordered to be disposed of before the end of the year 2015. In contempt petition taken out for the breach of the order dated 6th August 2015, vide
order dated 8th September 2016, the time for was extended by two months. Now, by virtue of the communication dated 24th September 2018 which
was referred earlier, the learned AGP claims that the revision application is disposed of by order dated 23rd August 2017. There is a serious doubt
whether within a reasonable time, the order was communicated to the parties apart from the fact that within the time fixed in writ petition and
extended in the contempt petition, the revision application was not disposed of. However, it is not necessary to grant any relief in the civil application
as now a copy of the judgment is available.
Prayers in other two writ petitions are for directing expeditious disposal of appeals preferred in the year 2016. The grievance made in the writ
petitions is that not only that the appeals were not taken up for consideration but even the prayer for interim relief was not heard. In these two
petitions, directions will have to be issued to decide the interim applications as well as appeals within a timeÂbound schedule.
Hence, we dispose of the civil application and the writ petitions by passing following order:
(i) In addition to the directions issued in the case of Smt.Savitri Chandrakesh Pal (supra), we direct the State Government to ensure that each and
every appeal/ revision application as well as review application are serially numbered on par with the proceedings filed in the Civil and District Courts.
Apart from maintaining the institution register, data entries shall be made of the proceedings filed on day to day basis on the dedicated website of the
State Government which shall be accessible to the citizens;
(ii) The State Government shall ensure that interim and final orders passed by it in quasi judicial proceedings (appeals/ revision applications/ review
applications) under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 are uploaded on the same dedicated website on which the data of proceedings is
uploaded;
(iii) The State Government shall ensure that an intimation of the date fixed for pronouncement of judgment is served to the parties to the proceedings;
(iv) The State Government shall make a provision for serving notices/ intimations of the dates fixed for hearing by e mail/SMS/whats app in addition
to usual mode of service to those parties who provide eÂmail addresses and cell phone numbers;
(v) We hold that a litigant who prefers appeal/ revision/ review application before the State Government under the said Code has a right to move the
appellate/ revisional authority and pray before the authority by appearing before the same that an application for ad interim relief/ interim relief
should be taken up immediately. It is the duty of the State to ensure that a litigant has an opportunity to mention his case before the appellate/
revisional authority for pointing out the urgency and for praying that application for interim/ adÂinterim relief should be taken up immediately. The
State Government may consider of conferring powers of hearing appeals/ revisions or interim applications therein on senior Secretaries who can hear
the proceedings in absence of the Hon'ble Ministers;
(vi) The appeals/ revision applications and interim applications made therein shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible and in accordance with
the guidelines provided in the Government Resolution dated 17th December 2017;
(vii) The appeals which are subject matter of Writ Petition (St.) Nos.11253/2017 and 11254/2017 shall be heard and disposed of within a period of six
weeks from the date this judgment and order is uploaded;
(viii) No separate direction is required to be issued in Civil Application No.2041/2018;
(ix) Both the writ petitions and the civil application are disposed of with the aforesaid directions.