WPMS/503/2012
2023 Latest Caselaw 2981 UK

               Office Notes,
              reports, orders
SL.          or proceedings or
      Date                                       COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No            directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures

                                 WPMS No.503 of 2012
                                 Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. K.S Mehta, learned Addl. CSC along with Mr. Rajesh Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the petitioner/ State.

The petitioner-State has preferred this writ-petition putting a challenge to the judgment dated 29.03.2011, as it has been rendered by respondent no.11, whereby the revision as it has been preferred under Section 219 of the Land Revenue Act, has been allowed.

The revision, which has been allowed, it relates to the proceedings, which were held under Section 54 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act and it was emanating from the Appellate Order under Section 210 of Land Revenue Act as rendered in Appeal No.52/45 of 2005-06, as decided on 08.12.2010.

If the operative portion of the impugned order of the Revisional Court is taken into consideration, the genesis of the proceedings happens to be under Section 54 of the Land Revenue Act.

The proceedings under the Land Revenue Act are summary in nature and they do not decide a right of the parties and rather any adjudication which is made therein, they do not determine the title or any material right of the parties may be under the settlement proceedings as prescribed under Section 54 of the Land Revenue Act. Section 54 of the Land Revenue Act cannot be read in isolation to the provisions contained under Section 40A of the Land Revenue Act, as the exception carved out therein with regards to the savings clause, that a person litigating in relation to the provisions prescribed and contained under Section 40A of the Land Revenue Act, will have a right to get their rights adjudicated by the competent regular Court and not by virtue of challenge to the summary proceedings before the High Court, which is a subject matter of the present writ-petition.

Thus, the writ-petition is dismissed with a liberty left open for the petitioner to resort to his remedies as provided under Section 40A of the Land Revenue Act.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 06.10.2023 Sukhbant