Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

While reprimanding the officials of the Revenue Department of Uttar Pradesh for their callous approach in removing illegal encroachment in village lands in the State, the Allahabad High Court recently observed that a better work culture among the officers is needed.  "...which is necessary for the betterment of not only affairs of all the villages of the State of UP but also for the country inasmuch as the soul of the country lives in the villages," said the court. 

The bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan underscored that in a democratic setup of the country where the three-tier system of governance is applicable, the affairs of the villages, etc. are an integral part of that three-tier system.

"...if the concerning Revenue Officers/ Officials discharge their duties as per law with promptness and the illegal encroachment etc. is removed well in time, those officers should be appreciated so that the other Revenue Officers/ Officials could aware that in case of good conduct they shall be appreciated and in case of misconduct they shall be punished," added the bench. 

While pointing out that earlier also, the high court has issued several guidelines pertaining to the procedure to be adopted by the revenue authorities in exercise of their power under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (Revenue Code) and Section 26 thereof, the single judge bench issued further directions.

Court also noted that the Revenue Department of the State has taken some more positive steps as well.

Taking note of the same, court ordered that the guidelines and directions so issued by the Revenue Department shall be treated as directions being issued by the high court and the Competent/ concerning Revenue Officers/ Officials shall abide by all the aforesaid directions in its letter and spirit.  "...failing which, the responsibility should be fixed not only upon the senior most Revenue Officer of the State of U.P. but also upon the Competent / concerning Revenue Officer/ Official of U.P. who is/ are in the down line of the Revenue Officers," held the court. 

Court highlighted that sometimes, in illegal encroachment matters, it is noticed that appropriate exercise/ steps are undertaken by the Competent Revenue Authority to remove the illegal encroachments from the public utility land of Gaon Sabha within a reasonable time and appropriate orders are also passed within a time prescribed, but no serious and appropriate steps are taken to execute those orders well in time. 

"resultant thereof, the illegal encroachments etc. persist for quite a long time and the very purpose to take prompt steps is frustrated," said the court. 

Court noted that the excuse so taken by the concerned Officers/ Officials is that, an application for recall of earlier order is pending consideration.

Therefore, to meet out the aforesaid unwarranted situation, court directed that the Competent Revenue Officer i.e. the Assistant Collector, Ist Class / Officials must execute the first order being passed for removal/ vacation of illegal encroachment at the earliest as prescribed under the law.

Further, while stressing that sometimes, there are ulterior motives of the officers themselves in keeping the appropriate steps for removing encroachment pending for unlimited period, court directed that the Sub-Divisional Officer, or District Magistrate, or Commissioner or the Board of Revenue, as the case may be, must be vigilant on this aspect and those officers must develop a mechanism to notice the aforesaid casual or callous approach of erring Officers/ Officials.

"The sense of deterrence is must," said the court. 

The court passed the order in a PIL seeking directions to remove illegal encroachment on public utility land in Village Tendua, Tehsil- Bilgram, District- Hardoi.

Though the court found the PIL filed with ulterior motives as the private grievances had been raised in garb of public interest matters, court instead of dismissing the instant PIL, disposed it of while issuing further directions to the Revenue Department of the state in public interest. 

Case Title: Nanhe Lal Kanaujia v. State of UP and others