Shayad Khan vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Sanjay Yadav, J.—Heard on admission.

Order dated 17.1.2014 passed by Board of Revenue in Revision No. 3058-PBR/2013 is being assailed vide this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

Background facts in nutshell are that a government agricultural land admeasuring 1.214 hectare of Khasra No. 161/1 of Village Hakeemkhedi, Tahsil Raisen, Patwari Halka No. 28 was allotted on Patta (lease) to one Kallu Khan by Naib Tahsildar vide order dated 28.4.1987 in Revenue Case No. 01/19/86-87. Kallu Khan transferred the land in favour of the petitioner in 1994 without seeking prior permission from lessee, i.e., State Government and was mutated in Revenue Record on 12.8.1994.

That, the State Government on being made aware of the transaction of government land by the lessee without taking prior permission, through its department of Revenue issued various directions vide circular No. 7252//Revenue/2009 dated 30.11.2009 for the inquiry into the illegalities. Enquiry led to revelation of illegalities in transaction which led the competent authority in exercise of suo motu Revisional power to cancel Patta by order dated 30.10.2012 and a direction to initiate disciplinary action against such officials who facilitated the transaction. The order was challenged before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue besides affirming the Revisional Order, also found that the Revision is barred by six months and no application for condonation filed by the petitioner.

Though it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the authorities concerned have committed grave error in exercise of powers of suo motu Revision belatedly; however, it being not disputed that the land in question being a government land leased out to Kallu Khan ought not have transferred the said land without following the due procedure prescribed under Section 165 (7-b) of Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959, which carves an exception to sub-section (1) of Section 165 stipulating:

"(7-b) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub- section (1), a person who holds land from the State Government or a person who holds land in bhumiswami rights under sub-section (3) of Section 158 or whom right to occupy land is granted by State Government or the Collector as a Government lessee and who subsequently becomes bhumiswami of such land, shall not transfer such land without the permission of a Revenue Officer, not below the rank of a Collector, given for reasons to be recorded in writing."

Thus, if an act is required to be done in certain manner, it must be done in the said manner otherwise it will not acquire the status of a valid act, and such invalid act with passage of time does not get validated. It was, therefore, within the power of the competent authority on being apprised of the illegality committed to have check the same by suo motu revisional powers, for that no period of limitation is prescribed, because it is the lessor which exercised the power.

Viewed thus, no illegality is perceived in the impugned order, as would warrant any interference.

Consequently, Revision fails and is dismissed. However, no costs.