(1) This petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 23.10.2020 issued by the Registrar, Board of Revenue, Lucknow, and the order dated 27.10.2020 issued by the District Magistrate, Rae Bareli, directing the Tehsildar Kachhwa to implement the order dated 02.01.1996 which is an order of PA-11 under Section 33-A of the U.P. Land Revenue Act and also the consequential action taken by the Tehsildar Sadar on 27.10.2020 duly transcribing the same on the Khatauni for Fasli year 1424-1429 for Village Akbarpur Kachhwa, Pargana Tehsil and District Rae Bareli.
(2) Shri Vivek Raj Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Sarvesh Dubey, and Ms. Avantika Singh appears for the petitioners and Shri I.B. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Ishan Baghel, appears for the contesting-respondents nos.5 & 6.
(3) It is the case of the petitioners that one Sardar Shamsher Singh son of Late Nihal Singh was the Talukedar who owned three properties one situated at Lucknow and two situated at Village Kachhwa and Village Undwa, District Rae Bareli respectively. Sardar Shamsher Singh had three children i.e. one son Kunwar Brijendra Singh and two daughters namely Smt. Daljit Kaur and Smt. Indrajeet Kaur. Kunwar Brijendra Singh was married to one Smt. Narendra Kumari initially and later on, to one Smt. Madhu Shukla. The Opposite Party nos.5 & 6 are sons of Smt. Madhu Shukla while the petitioners are son of Smt. Indrajit Kaur and Shri Jaini Singh i.e. daughter and son-in-law of Sardar Shamsher Singh. The Opposite party nos.5 & 6 are trying to take psossession over the properties of the petitioners situated at Village Undwa on the basis of the orders impugned and therefore this petition has been filed.
(4) It has been submitted by Shri V.R. Singh, that Late Sardar Shamsher Singh had made out a registered will on 26.01.1991 and later another unregistered will on 25.11.1994 and thereafter died on 28.11.1994. The Opposite party nos.5 & 6 through their mother approached the Tehsildar Sadar, Rae Bareli for entry of their names under Section 33-A of the Land Revenue Act on the basis of Succession for village Kachhwa. Such orders were passed on 02.01.1996 for Village Kachhwa in the meantime the petitioners initiated the proceedings for Mutation on the basis of unregistered will on 25.11.1994 under Section 34 of the Land Revenue Act on 16.01.1996. During the pendency of the Mutation proceedings another order under Section 33-A of PA-11 was made for properties situated at Village Undwa on 25.01.1996.
(5) The petitioners being aggrieved by the orders dated 02.01.1996 and 25.01.1996 approached the District Magistrate, alleging that the Succession Certificate issued by the office of the District Magistrate, Lucknow, was a forged document and the District Magistrate, Rae Bareli sought clarification from the office of the District Magistrate, Lucknow, regarding such allegation. The District Magistrate, Lucknow, clarified on 12.02.1996 that no Succession Certificate has been issued from the office of the District Magistrate in favour of Smt. Madhu Shukla as guardian of the Opposite party nos.5 & 6. On the basis of such clarification the District Magistrate, Rae Bareli, passed an order on 19.02.1996. In the meantime, an application has been moved by Smt. Narendra Kumari, the first wife of Kunwar Brijendra Singh on the basis of which a succession certificate was issued recognizing Smt. Narendra Kumari and her daughter Neeta Kumari as heirs of Kunwar Brijendra Singh. Smt. Narendra Kumari also approached the Tehsildar for cancellation of order dated 02.01.1996 saying that the same had been obtained on the basis of a Succession Certificate which was found to be forged. Initially, the Tehsildar, Sadar passed an order on 15.05.1997 staying his earlier order dated 02.01.1996. Later on, on 30.06.1997 he set aside the order under Section 33-A for Village Kachhwa leaving it open for the parties to produce evidence in regular mutation proceedings for Succession to the property of Late Shamsher Singh.
(6) An application for recall was moved by the Opposite party nos.5 & 6 before the Tehsildar alleging that they had not been heard before passing of the order dated 30.06.1997. The Tehsildar rejected the application for recall on 11.07.1997. The Opposite party nos.5 & 6 approached the District Magistrate, Rae Bareli, against the orders passed by the Tehsildar dated 30.06.1997 and 11.07.1997 but no interference was shown by the District Magistrate under Section 219 of the Land Revenue Act. The PA-11 entry, therefore, stood cancelled. However, the mutation proceedings were continuing. It has been argued that now on the basis of an order issued by the Registrar, Board of Revenue, on 23.10.2020 directing the implementation of the order passed in PA-11, the District Magistrate has issued a letter to the Tehsildar, Sadar and the Tehsildar, Sadar has recorded the names of the Opposite party nos.5 & 6 on the Khatauni of Village Undwa.
(7) It has been submitted by Shri I.B. Singh, learned Senior Advocate who appears for the Opposite party nos.5 & 6 that the petitioners are claiming their right on the basis of an unregistered Will dated 25.11.1994. On the basis of the same Will, the petitioners had filed a suit for permanent injunction against the Opposite party nos.5 & 6 and some other parties before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Lucknow, wherein their applications for temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the CPC was rejected. Against the order dated 18.01.2006 rejecting the temporary injunction application in Regular Suit No.928 of 2005, the petitioners/their father approached the District Judge and thereafter this Court in FAFO No.105 of 2006 (Jaini Singh Vs. M/s Viraj Construction Private Ltd. and Others).
(8) This Court while rejecting the FAFO had observed that the Will dated 25.11.1994 was an unregistered document and Late Shamsher Singh being a Talukedar governed by the Awadh Estate 1869 was mandated under law to make out a Will and get it registered also. The earlier Will dated 26.06.1991 was a last will of Late Shamsher Singh which was kept in safe custody of ADM (Finance and Revenue), Lucknow, and on the death of Shamsher Singh, the said Will was opened and got registered in the office of the Registrar on 20.01.1995. In the Will dated 26.06.1991 only a small portion of the property was given by Shamsher Singh to his grand sons through Indrajit Kaur and Jaini Singh, while remaining property was given to his son Kunwar Brijendra Singh and his grand children through him and Smt. Madhu i.e. Opposite party nos.5 & 6.
(9) The learned Senior Advocate has emphasized that the mutation proceedings were decided initially by Tehsildar Maharajganj on 31.12.2012 on the basis of an unregistered Will dated 25.11.1994. The Opposite party nos.5 & 6 filed an Appeal before the SDM who set aside the order dated 31.12.2012 and remitted the matter back to the Tehsildar to consider afresh after giving opportunity of hearing. The petitioners filed a Revision against such order which Revision was rejected and the order of the SDM was maintained as a result whereof the mutation proceedings are still pending in the court of Tehsildar, Maharajganj.
(10) Shri I.B Singh, has also led this Court through the orders passed by the Board of Revenue in the challenge made by the Opposite party nos.5 & 6 to the orders dated 15.05.1997, 30.06.1997, 11.07.1997 and 28.09.1998. It has been submitted that the Board of Revenue had maintained the order dated 02.01.1996 relating to Village Kachhwa whereas the order dated 25.01.1996 relating to Village Undwa was held to have been passed during the pendency of the Mutation application filed by the petitioners and therefore the same was set aside. Later on, the order passed by the Board of Revenue on 28.08.2006 was amended and clarified saying that the orders passed on PA-11 being Administrative Orders, they would be subject to Section 34 proceedings, and the parties will not transfer or sell the land till final disposal of the Mutation proceedings.
(11) It has been submitted by Shri I.B. Singh, that the writ petition arises out of orders passed in Mutation proceedings and in PA-11 entries, which by themselves do not confer any Right, Title or Interest in any person and it is always open for the parties to file a Suit for declaration before the appropriate Civil or Revenue Court. Ordinarily, this Court should not interfere in writ jurisdiction in orders passed in Mutation proceedings.
(12) However, Shri Vivek Raj Singh, in Rejoinder submits that PA-11 entries having been set aside on 30.06.1997 and the order being confirmed by the District Magistrate under Section 219 of the Land Revenue Act on 28.08.1998, they cannot now be directed to be recorded in the Revenue Records only on the basis of a letter issued by the Registrar, Board of Revenue. The order being without jurisdiction and against the settled provisions of law ought to be interfered with by this Court.
(13) Shri I.B. Singh, on the other hand, has laid emphasis in the order passed on 28.08.2006 by the Board of Revenue Annexure-11 to the writ petition and the order dated 26.11.2010 again passed by the Board of Revenue filed as Annexure-12 to the petition. It has been submitted on the basis of such orders that the Board of Revenue had clarified that the orders passed on 15.05.1997, 30.06.1997, 11.07.1997 and 28.09.1998 were Administrative Orders only and having been passed relating to PA-11 entries, were subject to Mutation proceedings under Section 34 and has also emphasized that the Tehsildar has only been directed to maintain the PA-11 entries initially made out in favour of Opposite party nos.5 & 6 in the Revenue records and at the same time made them conditional to the proceedings pending under Section 34 and prohibiting either of the parties to sell out or transfer the properties in dispute in the meantime. The Tehsildar in compliance of the order of the Board of Revenue by the order impugned has only mentioned the names of Opposite party nos.5 & 6 through their mother Madhu Shukla in the Revenue Record and at the same time mentioned in the said order that it shall be subject to final orders passed in Mutation proceedings and has prohibited the transfer of such land also. Such type of order should not be interfered with by this Court in writ jurisdiction.
(14) Having heard the parties at length and having gone through the entire record as annexed in the writ petition, this Court finds that the entries made in PA-11 on 02.01.1996 with respect to Village Kachhwa and 25.01.1996 with respect of Village Undwa were challenged and the entries made in PA-11 for Village Undwa were not interfered with, only entries made with respect to Village Kachhwa were interfered with by the Board of Revenue. In so far as village Undwa is concerned, the entry PA-11 still stand although they are subject to final orders passed in Mutation proceedings which are pending under Section 34 of the Land Revenue Act and have also been made subject to the condition that the disputed properties shall not be transferred i.e. no third party interest be created.
(15) Admittedly, the Mutation proceedings are still going on. Although initially they were decided on 31.12.2012 but the orders were set aside and the matter remitted to Tehsildar to consider afresh even if mutation proceedings are decided the Right, Title or Interest to the property in dispute are always subject to appropriate proceedings to be initiated by either of the parties before the Competent Civil or Revenue Courts. The PA-11 entries dated 02.01.1996 with respect to Village Kachhwa have been suitably written in limited and conditional language hedging the same with the Caveat that the property shall not be transferred and shall remain subject to final orders passed under Section 34. This Court, therefore, does not feel it appropriate to pass any orders in this petition on the prayer as claimed by the petitioners.
(16) However, considering the other submissions made by the learned Senior Advocates for both the parties, it is directed that both the parties shall appear before the Tehsildar, Maharajganj and not seek unnecessary adjournments in the pending Mutation proceedings. The Mutation Case No.1077/2017-12-2012 (Surendra Singh and Others Vs. Sardar Shamsher Singh and others) shall be decided in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the Tehsildar, Maharajganj.
(17) This petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 13.1.2021 PAL