LALJI Vs. SHAMSUDDIN KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Yogesh Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondents no. 2 and 3. Notice need not be issued to the respondent no. 1, in view of the order being passed herein. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 09.07.2001 passed by the Record Officer Sonebhadra in Appeal No.608/677/ 689/406 under Section 210 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act (Samshuddin Khan Vs. Lalji) as also the order dated 11.07.2012 passed by the Board of Revenue in Revision No.146/LR/2000-01 (Lalji Vs. Samshuddin Khan). According to Sri Yogesh Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioner no. 1, Lalji (since deceased) now through his legal representatives had initiated proceedings being Case No.6836 (Lalji Vs. Shamsuddin & others) before the Assistant Record Officer, Obra, Sonebhadra, wherein by the order dated 27.04.1992 the land in question comprised in Gata No. 532 area 0.025 hectares has been declared as abadi and recorded under Column 6 (2). He states that the respondent no.1, Shamsuddin Khan filed an appeal against the said order being Appeal No.608/677/689/406 (Shamsuddin Khan Vs. Lalji) wherein the Appellate Court by the impugned order dated 09.07.2001 has set aside the order dated 27.04.1992 of the Assistant Record Officer and directed that the land in question should continue to be recorded as bhoomidhari land. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that feeling aggrieved the petitioners filed Revision No.146/LR/2000-01 (Lalji Vs. Shamsuddin Khan) wherein the Revisional Court has dismissed the revision of the petitioners by the impugned order dated 11.07.2012. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners the Assistant Record Officer, Obra, Sonebhadra, had rightly passed the order dated 27.04.1992 whereby he has specifically recorded that abadi is existing over the land in question and therefore, it should be recorded as abadi in revenue records. For the said purpose, he has placed reliance on the provisions of Section 54 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act and submits that in view of the said provisions, a summary inquiry can be conducted by the Assistant Record Officer and if it is found that the land in dispute belongs to the State Government or a Local Authority, he can cause an unauthorized occupant to be evicted from the land in question. Basing his submission on aforesaid provision he states that the Assistant Record Officer has got jurisdiction to adjudicate the application made by the petitioners with respect to the land in question and having jurisdiction the Assistant Record Officer has recorded a finding of fact that there is abadi existing over the land in question since last many years and therefore, he has rightly corrected the revenue records by revising earlier entry which was shown as bhoomidhari in 1372 F.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners after justifying the order of the Assistant Record Officer has assailed the appellate order by saying that the appellate authority has illegally accepted and allowed the appeal of the respondent no. 1, Shamsuddin Khan by recording that the Assistant Record Officer has no jurisdiction to convert bhoomidhari land into abadi. He submits that the revisional court has also committed similar error in rejecting the revision of the petitioners.

(3.) THE Assistant Record Officer can only exercise his jurisdiction for correcting clerical mistakes or errors in the map and record under the U.P. Land Revenue Act, which is not for the purpose of changing the nature and identity of land from bhoomidhari to abadi. What has been done by the Assistant Record Officer in the order dated 27.04.1992 is that he has converted a land which is entered in the revenue records till 1372 F as bhoomidhari land into abadi land and recorded it under Column 6(2). The submission of Mr. Saxena that there is no dispute that the abadi is situate over the land in question, cannot be of any help to him because even if abadi has been made over bhoomidhari land, the relevant provisions of Chapter VIII of the U.P. Zamindari and Land Reforms Act have to be complied with for the purpose of converting and recording bhoomidhari land into abadi land. The Assistant Record Officer is not an authority competent to record such change in the garb of correcting clerical mistakes or errors. A finding of fact has been recorded by the Assistant Record Officer that the land in question was entered in the name of Shamsuddin Khan and others as Sankramaniya Bhoomidhar upto 1372 F. Therefore, he has exercised a jurisdiction which he did not have for converting and recording bhoomidhari land into abadi. On an appeal filed by the respondent no.1, Shamsuddin Khan the Appellate Authority namely the Record Officer, Sonebhadra has recorded that the order of Assistant Record Officer was illegal and he could not exercise jurisdiction to change the nature and identity of land by converting the bhoomidhari land into abadi and recording it in column 6(2) and has held that the Assistant Record Officer has passed the order beyond his jurisdiction.