Court No. 21
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 37429 of 2010
Shashi Kala Yadav
Versus
Additional District Judge, and others
Hon'ble V.K.Shukla,J.
In the present writ petition action which is being impugned, arises of
dispute wherein Lallan @ Lalla stacked claim before Nagar Nigam Varanasi
contending therein that over arazi no. 269/2 his name has been mutated
and over house constructed on the said land non inclusion of name in the
assessment column was bad. Claim was referred to sub-committee
constituted and the said Sub-committee refused to accept the claim which
was set up by Lallan @ Lalla vide order dated 27.12.1999. Lallan preferred
appeal no. 34 of 2000 under Section 472 of U.P. Nagar Nigam Adhiniyam
and same was dismissed on 16.11.2007. Lallan preferred second appeal
under Section 476 of U.P. Nagar Nigam Adhiniyam and same has also been
dismissed on 03.02.2010. Against the said order in question present writ
petition has been filed.
Sri Raj Karan Yadav, contented with vehemence that in the present
case orders which have been passed are unsustainable, as such same are
liable to be quashed and directives should be issued for correcting the
record and recording the name of petitioner as well that of respondent
Vishnu Yadav.
Countering the said submission Sri M.L.Rai Advocate contended that
proceedings in question are summary proceedings and only for the purposes
of realization of tax and revenue said exercise is undertaken and same does
not decide and adjudicate any substantive right of the parties, as such writ
petition in question is liable to dismissed.
After respective arguments have been advanced, factual position is
that proceedings for mutation are summary proceedings cannot be disputed
and same has to be decided summarily on the basis of possession and
object of the same is to see that person who is in possession pays taxes and
said proceeding in no way adjudicates substantive right of the parties qua
2
the property in question. In such a situation and in this background once
based on the possession decision has been taken in summary proceeding
then this Court refuses to interfere and leave the question raised in the
present writ petition to be decided in suit. Orders which are subject matter
of challenge in the present writ petition arising out of summary proceedings,
are always subject matter of regular suit, in such a situation in this
background writ petition is dismissed with the observation that it would be
open for the petitioner to approach civil court for adjudication of their right
and it is also made clear that orders which are subject matter of challenge
in the present writ petition will not come in the way of petitioner to get his
right adjudicated by civil court which would be decided on the basis of
evidence adduced without being influenced of the proceeding in summary
proceedings.
Consequently, present writ petition is dismissed.
No order as to cost.
Dated 05th July, 2010
Dhruv