The Allahabad HC in a recent decision held that Sub Divisional Magistrate while exercising adjudicatory powers of a judicial nature acts as a 'Revenue Court', as defined under Section 2(16) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, and as such would be a court subordinate to the Board of Revenue and subject to its revisional jurisdiction and also its control and supervision.
A single judge bench of Justice Yogendra Kumar Shrivastava held that the revisional jurisdiction of the Board is provided for by Section 210 of the Code, and in terms thereof, it is empowered to call for the record of any suit or proceedings decided by any subordinate revenue court, in which no appeal lies.
Brief Facts:
As per pleadings in the writ petition, the petitioner claims to have purchased certain land parcels by means of a sale deed dated 24.06.2019 and his name was also mutated in the revenue records in terms of an order dated 09.01.2019. Thereafter, upon coming to know with regard to the pendency of a declaratory suit filed by the respondent Nos. 7 and 8 in respect of the said land, an impleadment application dated 26.09.2019 was filed, which was dismissed for want of prosecution by an order dated 19.02.2020. The restoration application filed there was also rejected by an order dated 30.12.2020.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The learned Counsel for the Petitioner contended that once the Board of Revenue, in the exercise of its revisional powers, had set aside the earlier orders dated 19.02.2020 and 30.12.2020 and had remitted the matter to the court of respondent No. 3, the said respondent could not have ignored the order passed by the revisional court and reject the recall/restoration application.
Observations of the Court:
This Court noted that the Board of Revenue as per Section 8 of the Code, 2006, is the chief controlling authority in all matters relating to the disposal of cases, appeals, or revisions. The revisional jurisdiction of the Board is provided by Section 210 of the Code, and in terms thereof, it is empowered to call for the record of any suit or proceedings decided by any subordinate revenue court, in which no appeal lies, for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any order passed in such suit or proceedings. The language of the section is one of wide amplitude and embraces within its fold any suit or proceeding decided by the revenue courts subordinate to the Board of Revenue.
In view of this court, the Sub Divisional Magistrate while exercising adjudicatory powers of a judicial nature acts as a 'Revenue Court', as defined under Section 2(16) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, and as such would be a court subordinate to the Board of Revenue and subject to its revisional jurisdiction and also its control and supervision.
The Court found out that Counsel for the parties are ad idem on the point it would serve the interest of justice if the case is remitted to respondent No. 3 for the passing of a fresh order, after taking into consideration the order dated 05.07.2021 passed by the Board of Revenue in the revision.
Having regard to the aforesaid, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the order dated 23.08.2022.
The decision of the Court:
The Allahabad HC set aside the order dated 23.08.2022 and the matter is remitted to respondent No. 3 to pass a fresh order keeping in view the direction issued by the Board of Revenue in its order dated 05.07.2021.
Case Title: Brijesh Kumar Dubey vs State of UP and others
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Yogendra Kumar Shrivastava
Case no.: WRIT C No. 38508 of 2022
Advocate for the Petitioner: Radhey Krishna Pandey,Manish Pandey
Advocate for the Respondent: - C.S.C.,Ajattshatru,Awadhesh Kumar Mishra
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
