BALE SINGH Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER
LAWS(ALL)-2017-4-89
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on April 19,2017

BALE SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA), J. - (1.) Heard Sri Arvind Srivastava for the petitioners, Standing Counsel for the State of U.P. and Sri Rakesh Kumar Srivastava for the respondent-3. This writ petition has been filed against the order of SDO dated 14.10.2016 and the order of Additional Commissioner dated 6.3.2017.
(2.) By the impugned order, it has been held that the Revenue Courts have no jurisdiction to correct the error crept in CH Form 45, prepared during consolidation operation. Section 27(3) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 provides as follows: - "27 (3) After the issue of notification under Section 52, the Collector shall, instead of the map, field book and record of rights previously maintained by him, maintain the map, field-book and record of rights prepared in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1) [and the provisions of the UP Land Revenue Act, 1901, relating to the maintenance and correction of such map, field book and record of rights shall mutatis mutandis apply]."
(3.) Thus, according to the provisions of Section 27(3), the Collector is not only authorised to maintain the record prepared during consolidation, but he is also authorised to correct any mistake crept in it.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.