Court rules Tehsildar lacks authority to compel land record submission at private party's request, quashes prior orders.
In a significant ruling, the Chhattisgarh High Court has quashed orders by the Tehsildar and the Additional Collector that compelled petitioners, Deepak S/o Manohar Patnaik and another, to produce land records, known as Rin Pustika, at the request of a private respondent. The court held that such compulsion was beyond the Tehsildar's authority under the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code.
The case, adjudicated by Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, arose from an order dated March 17, 2021, wherein the Tehsildar of Sarangarh directed the petitioners to submit their land records following an application by a private respondent. This order was subsequently affirmed by the Additional Collector on May 30, 2022, in Revenue Revision Case No.42/A-6/2020-21.
The petitioners, represented by Advocate Mr. Haishankar Patel, contended that the Tehsildar's directive was illegal and sought to have both the Tehsildar's and the Collector's orders quashed. The respondents, including the state represented by Panel Lawyer Mr. Amit Nayak, argued in favor of the orders.
In its decision, the court emphasized that the Tehsildar could not compel document production unless necessary for adjudication in an ongoing proceeding. The court noted that no such proceeding was pending, and the application by the private respondent was independent, thus making the orders legally impermissible.
The court further clarified that while the Tehsildar could draw adverse inferences for non-production of documents, compelling production at a private party's behest was against the law. Consequently, both the Tehsildar's and the Collector's orders were deemed erroneous and were quashed.
This ruling reinforces the principle that revenue authorities must adhere to legal provisions and cannot overstep their bounds by enforcing document production without proper proceedings. The judgment underscores the importance of due process and the protection of parties from undue compulsion by administrative authorities.
Bottom line:-
Tehsildar has no authority to compel a party to produce documents at the instance of a private respondent; adverse inference may be drawn for non-production of documents, but compulsion to produce them is against the provisions of law.
Statutory provision(s):
Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code
Deepak v. State of Chhattisgarh, (Chhattisgarh) : Law Finder Doc id # 2942446
