RAVINDRA CHOUDHARY Vs. SHRIVASTAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER seeks quashment of the proceedings initiated by respondent No. 1-The Dy. General Manager, M.P. Financial Corporation-cum-Addl. Tehsildar (Recovery), Indore, under section 146 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short, 'the Code'), on the basis of R.R.C. raised by respondent No. 2-The Madhya Pradesh Financial Corporation.

(2.) PETITIONER seeks to impugn the recovery proceedings on two grounds: one, that respondent No. 1 not being a Revenue Officer and being an officer of the M.P.F.C. could not have been invested with the powers of the Tehsildar/Addl. Tehsildar under the provisions of the Code; and, two, that no such recovery proceedings could be initiated without first taking recourse to the provisions of Ss. 29 and 31 of the State Financial Corporation Act.

(3.) A bare reading of sub-section (1) of Sec. 24 makes it clear that the State Government has power to confer powers of a Revenue Officer on any person. It was, however, contended by Shri Garg, learned counsel for petitioner that such conferral of power u/s 24(1) can be made only on a Revenue Officer as provided u/s 11. The contention is wholly unacceptable on the face of the plain language used in Sec. 24(1). The words 'any person' used in sub-sec. (1) makes it abundantly clear that powers conferred by or under this Code on any Revenue Officer can also be conferred on any other person by the State Government. In the instant case also the powers of Addl. Tehsildar have been conferred by the State Government on respondent No. 1 for the purposes of making reference u/s 146 of the Code. It is hardly of any consequence that respondent No. 1 happens to be an officer of the M.P. Financial Corporation. In fact, it is for the purpose of recovery of the loan due to the respondent-Corporation that this power has been conferred on its own Dy. General Manager. It cannot be thus said that respondent No. 1 acted without jurisdiction in initiating the recovery proceedings u/s 146.