Sri Deen Mohammad & Others vs Noor Hasan & Others

Manoj K. Tiwari, J.

By means of this writ petition, petitioners have challenged the order dated 08.10.2018 passed by Board of Revenue, Uttarakhand in mutation proceedings. Learned Board of Revenue has held in its judgment that question of title cannot be decided in mutation proceedings which are summary in nature.

Mutation of a property in the revenue record does not create or extinguish title nor has it any presumptive value on title. It only enables the person in whose favour mutation is ordered to pay the land revenue. The proceedings under Section 34/35 of Land Revenue Act 1901 are summary in nature, which are subject to Section 40-A of the said Act. Even otherwise also, the question of title cannot be decided in the summary proceedings under Section 34/35 of the Act and the petitioners have the remedy to file declaratory suit under Section 229-B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act before a Revenue Court.

The view taken by Board of Revenue in consonance with the law of the land. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ram Badan Rai and others vs. Union of India and others reported in (1999) 1 SCC 705 has considered the nature of proceedings under U.P. Land Revenue Act 1901. Paragraph no. 56 of the said judgment is extracted below:-

"We shall briefly refer to the scheme of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901. Section 32 in Chapter III of the abovesaid Act of 1901 deals with record of rights and Sections 39 and 40 deal with correction of mistakes and settlement of disputes. Under Section 54, for revising maps and records, the Assistant Records Officer shall cause survey and map correction to be made after issue of notice to affected parties. Orders passed by the Assistant Records Officer under Section 54(6) are final subject to appeal under Section 210 and revision under Section 219. Section 40(2) permits the Collector/Tahsildar to decide questions of possession and if he is unable to satisfy himself as to which party is in possession, he shall ascertain by summary enquiry who is the person best entitled to the property and shall put such person in possession. Section 40-A, however says that no order under Sections 33, 35 , 39, 40, 41 or 54 shall bar any suit in a competent court for relief on the basis of a right in a holding. Section 57 of the Act also states that entries or decisions shall not 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 under Section

Therefore, discussion (sic decision) on the question of title if given under the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901, would not put an end to litigation."

In such view of the matter, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment rendered by Board of Revenue. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, petitioners shall be at liberty to get the title, if any, declared in a regular suit.