Jurisdiction of Revenue Authorities

2020 SCMR 643 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Decisions of the courts were binding on the Revenue authorities.

2016 YLR 1610 BOARD-OF-REVENUE-PUNJAB Judicial Precedent

Ss. 161, 163, 164 & 172Correction of any entry in record-of-rightsJurisdiction of Revenue Authorities

Petitioner, submitted an application before District Collector for correction of entries in revenue record pertaining to certain Khasra-Numbers

Collector, on report of Revenue Field Staff, recorded the remarks "As Proposed"

Respondents challenged said order in appeal

Additional Commission/Appellate Authority accepted appeal and set aside impugned order of Collector, with the observations that impugned order of the Collector was sketchy

Validity

District Collector on Office Note, without any independent application of mind recorded "As Proposed"

Such perfunctory approval granting permission to review the order of Revenue Officer concerned, could not sustain; as even permission to review would entail consequences for the parties, and would initiate a legal process, which the parties had to undergo

Reviewing Authority, would be required to hear the parties before passing any order to review, or to uphold the existing order in terms of S.163(1) of Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1967, but review sanctioning authority, had to examine and see; whether prima facie the facts agitated, warranted initiation of review, or fell within the ambit of grounds/parameters to invoke review

Such permission to review, should proceed on independent application of mind, rather than relying on an Office Note

Additional Commissioner, had rightly set aside the order of District Collector

In absence of any ground to interfere in the impugned order of the Additional Commissioner, revision petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

2015 MLD 102 BOARD-OF-REVENUE-PUNJAB Judicial Precedent

Ss. 161 & 164Theft of treesCriminal proceedingsJurisdiction of Revenue AuthoritiesScopeAllegation against the petitioners was that they had stolen 5 Shisham trees from the government landOn recommendation of Inquiry Officer, District Collector ordered registration of criminal case against the petitionersAppellate Authority dismissed appeal against order of CollectorValidity

In the present case, due to allegation of commission of a criminal act against the petitioners, matter was not to be adjudicated upon under the provisions of West Pakistan Revenue Land Act, 1967

Petitioners, would have every opportunity to prove their case before the Police Authorities or the court of competent jurisdiction, which would be appropriate forums for the petitioners

Petition was disposed of by the Board of Revenue with the observation that petitioners could approach the Police Authorities for redressal of their grievances, in circumstances.

2013 CLC 1743 BOARD-OF-REVENUE-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Ss. 42, 53, 161 & 164Inheritance mutation attested 86 years ago, setting aside ofJurisdiction of Revenue AuthoritiesScope

Such mutation attested in year 1920 was challenged in year 1962 in appeal, which was dismissed on 12-6-1962 by Deputy Commissioner (Revenue) for lack of jurisdiction

Appeal against such order dated 12-6-1962 was filed before District Officer (Revenue) in year 2004, which was dismissed for not being maintainable while directing appellant to seek his remedy before Civil Court

Executive District Officer (Revenue) set aside such mutation after accepting revision petition filed thereagainst in year 2006

Validity

Such order of Deputy Commissioner dated 12-6-1962 for not being challenged in appeal had attained finality

Executive District Officer had no jurisdiction to set aside such order passed in year 1962 after 42 years

Revenue authorities were not competent to undo such long-standing entries at such belated stage

Such matter would fall within jurisdiction of Civil Court

Board of Revenue set aside such order of Executive District Officer in circumstances.