Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 674 (ALL)

Santosh Kumar v. State of U. P.

2019-03-12

J.J.MUNIR

body2019
JUDGMENT : 1. The petitioner has come up with the following material relief: "(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no. 2 to decide the mutation application no. T201814360306517 dated 20.11.2018 pending before him. " 2. Heard Sri Dinesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ved Prakash Mishra, learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Dinesh Tiwari submits that the proceedings of this mutation case are pending since 20.11.2018. 4. The submission is that on account of a non decision of his application for mutation, the petitioner is suffering serious prejudice. He further submits that the Tehsildar is duty bound to decide his mutation application expeditiously. Mutation proceedings are summary proceedings. Moreover, they are fiscal in nature and, therefore, the interest of the State is also involved in an early decision of all mutation cases. 5. The Mutation Authority cannot be permitted to abdicate its functions and indulge in a rubber stamp adjournment of the case year after year, much to the prejudice of not only the parties, who seek mutation, but as said earlier, the interest of the State in its Revenue Department. It may be mentioned here that the provisions of Rule 34(7) of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016, framed under Section 35(1) of the Revenue Code, read as under :- "(7) The Tehsildar shall make an endeavour to decide the undisputed case of mutation within the period of 45 days from the date of the registration of the case and the disputed case of mutation within the period of 90 days and if the proceeding is not concluded within such period, the reason for the same shall be recorded." 6. A perusal of the aforesaid rule shows that the outermost time limit for the Tehsildar to decide a contested mutation case is 90 days. In a case where he crosses the aforesaid time limit, he has to record reasons for the delay which, in the instant case, has not at all been done. Rather, the order sheet shows utter apathy to any concern by the Tehsildar for an early decision of the mutation case. That is breach of the provisions of Rule 34(7) (Supra), which the law does not countenance. Rather, the order sheet shows utter apathy to any concern by the Tehsildar for an early decision of the mutation case. That is breach of the provisions of Rule 34(7) (Supra), which the law does not countenance. A statutory rule of the kind carried in Rule 34(7) of the Rules framed under the Code cannot be left to the whims of the Tehsildar bound under it to decide by a determinate calendar. If it were allowed to continue the way the Tehsildar has casually kept the mutation case pending in this matter for the last 14 years, the provisions of Rule 34(7) (Supra) would be bogged down and will ultimately become rudimentary by disuse. This cannot be permitted to happen. 7. Looking to the nature of the order proposed to be passed, no notice is being issued to respondent no. 4. In case, however, he has any grievance in the matter, he may make an application in the decided matter. 8. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, it is ordered that the Tehsildar, Tehsil Machhalisahar, District Jaunpur shall proceed to decide the mutation application no. T201814360306517, under Section 34 L.R. Act within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, positively and without fail. 9. This writ petition is allowed in terms of the above order. 10. Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the Collector, Jaunpur by the office within two weeks.