Mohan Singh Kharai And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

Petitioners have challenged judgment and order dated 07.11.2023 and 27.06.2025, passed by Collector, Nainital and Additional Commissioner, Kumaun Mandal, respectively, in mutation proceedings.

By judgment dated 07.11.2023, passed by Collector, Nainital in Appeal No. 15/14 of 2014-2015, mutation order passed by Tehsildar, Kaladhungi, District Nainital on 17.04.2012 was set aside and the matter was remanded back to Tehsildar, to decide the mutation application afresh after hearing the parties. The Additional Commissioner, Kumaun Mandal, vide order dated 27.06.2025 affirmed the order passed by Collector, Nainital.

I have gone through the judgment rendered by learned Collector, Nainital, as affirmed by Additional Commissioner, Kumaun Mandal. Learned Collector has given valid reason for setting aside the mutation order passed by Tehsildar, Kaladhungi and have remanded the matter back to Tehsildar.

Perusal of Collector’s judgment indicates that title dispute is also involved in the matter; the land in question belonged to one Mr. Bakhtawar Singh and after his death, several persons claimed title over his land, some based on gift deed and others based on will.

Petitioners claim to have purchased the land in question from respondent No. 3 and respondent No. 3 purchased the said land from respondent No. 2. Since Collector, Nainital has considered and discussed all relevant aspects for setting aside the mutation order and remanding the matter back to Tehsildar, therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter.

Law is well settled that mutation of name in revenue record neither creates nor extinguishes title. Mutation is done for fiscal purposes i.e. collection of land revenue. Disputed question of title cannot be decided in mutation proceeding, therefore, I dispose of the writ petition with liberty to petitioners to approach a competent Court of law by filing a regular suit for declaration of their rights.