Case Note & Summary
The original petitioner Kailash Hublal Gupta (since deceased, represented by legal heirs) filed a writ petition challenging orders dated 30.12.2004 passed by the Additional Collector, Amravati, and 23.03.2005 passed by the Commissioner, Amravati Division. The Additional Collector had allowed an amendment application filed by respondents No. 2 and 3 (Sheshrao Gulabrao Dhakade and Punjabrao Sheshrao Dhakade) in a revision under Section 257 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. The revision sought to challenge a mutation entry (Entry No.316) certified on 20.08.1982 in respect of field survey No.98, in which the petitioners' predecessors were recorded as purchasers. The respondents filed the revision almost 22 years after the mutation was certified. The Additional Collector allowed the amendment, and the Commissioner upheld that order in revision. The petitioners contended that the challenge was grossly belated and the authorities had no jurisdiction to condone such delay. The High Court, after hearing counsel for the petitioners and the Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No.1 (Commissioner), noted that respondents No.2 and 3 did not appear despite service. The Court held that the revision under Section 257 must be filed within a reasonable time, and a delay of 22 years is not permissible. The orders allowing the amendment were quashed and set aside, and the writ petition was allowed. The Court did not impose any order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Limitation - Revision under Section 257 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 - Delay of 22 years - The respondents sought to challenge a mutation entry certified in 1982 by filing a revision in 2004, which was beyond any reasonable period. The Additional Collector allowed an amendment to the revision application, and the Commissioner upheld it. The High Court held that the revision under Section 257 must be filed within a reasonable time, and a delay of 22 years is not permissible. The orders allowing the amendment were quashed. (Paras 3-5) B) Revenue Law - Mutation Entry - Finality of Revenue Records - The petitioners' names were recorded in 1982 and mutation certified. The respondents' challenge after 22 years without any explanation for delay was not maintainable. The Court emphasized that revenue entries should not be disturbed after such long lapse of time. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Additional Collector and Commissioner could allow an amendment to a revision application under Section 257 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, to challenge a mutation entry after 22 years, and whether such belated challenge is maintainable.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The order dated 30.12.2004 passed by the Additional Collector, Amravati and the order dated 23.03.2005 passed by the Commissioner, Amravati Division are quashed and set aside. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Limitation for revision under Section 257 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code
- 1966
- cannot be extended beyond prescribed period
- Mutation entry cannot be challenged after unreasonable delay
- Revenue authorities cannot condone delay beyond statutory period
