REVENUE RECORDS – Mutation – Finality of entries – Interference in revision – Impermissibility Paras 13, 17, 18, 19, 24(iii) Mutation of names in revenue records was effected in the year 1986–87 pursuant to registered transactions and the same was duly confirmed in Jamabandi proceedings, thereby attaining finality – The said entries remained unchallenged for a considerable length of time and rights stood crystallized in favour of the parties in possession – The appellate authority itself recorded that challenge to such mutation was highly belated (after about 16 years) and ordinarily not maintainable – Revisional authority, however, interfered with such settled entries by exercising powers under Section 9 of the ROR Act after an inordinate delay of nearly 16–19 years, without assigning proper reasons and ignoring the aspect of finality and delay – Held, where mutation entries have attained finality and third party rights have intervened, such settled positions cannot be reopened in exercise of revisional jurisdiction after long lapse of time – Even in absence of prescribed limitation, revisional power must be exercised within a reasonable period, failing which such exercise becomes arbitrary and illegal – Further held, finality attached to revenue entries and orders cannot be disturbed in a casual or belated manner, as it would lead to uncertainty in property rights – Accordingly, interference with long-standing mutation entries held unsustainable in law.

advocatemmmohan

REVENUE RECORDS – Mutation – Finality of entries – Interference in revision – Impermissibility

Paras 13, 17, 18, 19, 24(iii)

Mutation of names in revenue records was effected in the year 1986–87 pursuant to registered transactions and the same was duly confirmed in Jamabandi proceedings, thereby attaining finality – The said entries remained unchallenged for a considerable length of time and rights stood crystallized in favour of the parties in possession – The appellate authority itself recorded that challenge to such mutation was highly belated (after about 16 years) and ordinarily not maintainable –

Revisional authority, however, interfered with such settled entries by exercising powers under Section 9 of the ROR Act after an inordinate delay of nearly 16–19 years, without assigning proper reasons and ignoring the aspect of finality and delay –

Held, where mutation entries have attained finality and third party rights have intervened, such settled positions cannot be reopened in exercise of revisional jurisdiction after long lapse of time – Even in absence of prescribed limitation, revisional power must be exercised within a reasonable period, failing which such exercise becomes arbitrary and illegal –

Further held, finality attached to revenue entries and orders cannot be disturbed in a casual or belated manner, as it would lead to uncertainty in property rights – Accordingly, interference with long-standing mutation entries held unsustainable in law.