9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (4) TMI 537X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment (the respondent herein) by the order passed sometime on 11th January 1988. By his impugned order, the Deputy Collector at Dabhoi cancelled the mutation entry made and certified in the record of right pertaining to the subject-matter in each petition sometime during April to September 1981. 3. The facts giving rise to these petitions move in a narrow compass. Each petitioner purchased the respective subject-matter of each petition by a registered sale deed executed during March and April 1981. Thereafter each petitioner moved the concerned Talati for mutation of his name in the record of right pertaining to the subject-matter of each petition. In each case the entry was made and certified. during the period from April to September 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s D.E and F to each petition. 4. Learned Government Counsel Shri Anand for the respondent has raised a preliminary contention regarding maintainability of these petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Thereupon learned Counsel Kum. Shah for the petitioners has orally applied for leave to convert this petition as also under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Such oral request is accepted and each petition is ordered to be treated as also under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on condition of payment of the deficit Court-fees, if any, within two weeks from today. 5. Learned Counsel Kum. Shah for the petitioner has submitted that the mutation entry could not have been set aside in exercise of the revision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the Deputy Collector has been empowered under the Rules to exercise revisional jurisdiction over the mutation entries certified by the Mamlatdar. It has also been urged by learned Government Counsel Shri Anand for the respondent that, when the transaction on the basis of which a mutation entry is sought to be made and certified is found to be illegal, invalid, null or void, it would be open to the revenue authorities to cancel the entry within the reasonable period of time which could be beyond a period of one year. 6. In the aforesaid binding ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of Patel Raghav Natha (supra) it has been held that the revisional powers under Section 211 of the Code cannot be exercised beyond a reasonable period of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Supreme Court in the case of Patel Raghav Natha (supra) and the aforesaid Division Bench ruling of this Court in the case of Bhagwanji Bawanji Patel (supra). In that view of the matter, the impugned order at Annexure D to each petition cannot be sustained in law. An order affirming an illegal and invalid order is of no consequence. In that view of the matter, the impugned orders at Annexures E and F to each petition affirming impugned order at Annexure D to each petition cannot be sustained in law. 10. That brings me to the submission to the effect that the revenue authorities have no jurisdiction to decide whether or not a transaction is in contravention of any statutory provision contained in any other enactment. It may be noted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the State Government may from time to time by Rules prescribe in this behalf. Its bare perusal clearly goes to show that what is to be inquired is the correctness of the entries in the record of rights and the register of mutations in accordance with the Rules framed in that regard. It thus becomes clear that revenue authorities exercising powers with respect to RTS proceedings are invested with limited powers. They cannot assume to themselves certain powers not conferred on them by law. An authority having a limited jurisdiction cannot obviously expand its jurisdiction nor can assume jurisdiction not conferred on it by law. In that view of the mailer, it has no power to decide the validity of a transaction on the touchstone of a statut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owered thereunder and not by the revenue authorities in RTS proceedings. Sitting as a single Judge I am bound by the aforesaid ruling of this Court in the case of Evergreen Apartment Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (supra). Even otherwise, I am in respectful agreement with it. It provides a complete answer to the contrary submission urged before me by learned Government Counsel Shri Anand for the respondents to the effect that it would be open to the authorities to take into consideration the invalidity of the transaction if it is found to be in contravention of some statutory provision in some other enactment. 13. Since I am taking this view of the matter, it is not necessary to deal with the submission urged before me by learned Coun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
