CWP No. 4416 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 4416 of 2010 Date of decision:- 01.04.2011 Kishan Kumar son of Sh. Jiwan Lal, H. No. 219-20, Rajiv Nagar, C/o Jiwan Dharam Kanta, Kheri Bridge, Old Faridabad. ...... Petitioner Vs State of Haryana and others. ......Respondents CORAM:-HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. M.S. Uppal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Kulvir Narwal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Sudhir Hooda, Advocate, for Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 and 3. * * * * RANJAN GOGOI, C.J. (ORAL) This PIL has been filed seeking a direction from the Court for correction of the revenue record wherein mutation of the land measuring 6 kanals and 6 marlas in village Baselwa has been shown and recorded as 'Shamilat Deh'. According to the petitioner, the said land had all along been recorded in the name of the Municipal Corporation, Faridabad and the change of mutation was on account of certain fraudulent acts on the part of the concerned revenue officials at the relevant point of time. CWP No. 4416 of 2010 2 A written statement has been filed on behalf of the respondent No. 4 which would go to show that the Municipal Corporation, Faridabad was recorded as the owner in possession of the land in question and that a Civil Suit seeking reliefs to the contrary had been dismissed. The appeal filed against the decree passed in the said Civil Suit was also dismissed by the learned Appellate Court. Despite the above, the revenue entries were changed wrongly/fraudulently. However, the Patwari and Kanungo who were responsible for the aforesaid fraudulent acts having died in the meantime, no action against any revenue official has been initiated. In the aforesaid written statement, it has been further mentioned that as per the Land Record Manual (Section 44 para No. 7.30) the mutation entered in the revenue records cannot be reviewed and it is only the Civil Court which is competent to issue any contrary declaration. Having perused the written statement filed on behalf of the respondent No. 4 there can be no manner of doubt that the mutation in the revenue record, as it stands today, is a result of certain fraudulent actions by some revenue officials at the relevant point of time. We have been given to understand that the Land Record Manual is a set of administrative instructions, having the force of law, which deals with the matters pertaining to the procedure for making entries in the revenue records and the maintenance of such records. The entries in the revenue records, naturally, have to be based on the order(s) passed by the revenue officials. If such an order is vitiated by fraud, the mere fact that it had been entered in the revenue record, cannot be a ground for CWP No. 4416 of 2010 3 refusal to correct the same. In this regard, we have also perused the provisions of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and we find that by virtue of the provisions of Section 16 of the Act, as applicable to the State of Haryana, the Financial Commissioner is competent to pass any orders superseding the orders passed by any revenue official. Such powers can also be exercised by the Financial Commissioner suo-moto. Having regard to the aforesaid provisions of the Act, as applicable to the State of Haryana and taking into account that the mutation entered into the revenue record in the present case is contended to be vitiated by fraud, we direct the Financial Commissioner of the State of Haryana to initiate a suo-moto action under Section 16 of the Act. The Financial Commissioner thereafter shall decide the matter, of course, after giving an opportunity to the affected persons, if any, which opportunity is also visualized in terms of the expressed provisions of Section 16 of the Act. PIL shall stand allowed as indicated above. (RANJAN GOGOI) CHIEF JUSTICE (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) JUDGE 01.04.2011 Amodh