Important Intervention

Shri Prabodh Gour and S.C. Tripathi, Advocates filed a petition dated 14.2.2000 before the Commission, pursuant to the directions of the High Court of Allahabad. The matter was brought before the High Court of Allahabad by Shri Lal Bihari "Mritak" of District Azamgarh who was, like many others, shown to be dead in the revenue records and it took him almost 2 decades to make the authority to accept that he was, in fact, alive so that his land could not be taken away by treating him as dead. The petitioners also submitted, with the petition, copies of various documents forming part of record of the writ petition before the High Court. The High Court, while disposing of writ petition, observed that there were no adversaries. In addition, the Court said that the circle of public justice will not be complete unless departmental and administrative proceedings are taken out against the erring officials by State of U.P. Hereinafter, investigations will take place as may be directed by the National Human Rights Commission.
On consideration of the reports received from the Joint Secretary, Government of UP, DM, Azamgarh and comments of Shri Probodh Gaur, Advocate, Amicus before the Commission, the Commission directed:
"The report of District Magistrate, Azamgarh reveals that on enquiry, out of the 90 matters, allegations of manipulation of revenue records were not substantiated in 61 cases. However, in 29 cases, allegations of alteration of revenue records by showing living persons as dead were found true by the Administration. DM has informed that in all those 29 cases revenue records have been set right.
DM, Azamgarh has also reported that out of those 29 cases, the State Government has initiated disciplinary enquiry as well as prosecution against the public servants found responsible for manipulation of revenue records in 11 matters. In 9 other matters, only the prosecution of delinquent public servants have been initiated. In one matter, only disciplinary proceedings against the public servant concerned have been initiated. In 4 cases, delinquent public servants could not be proceeded against as they had expired and in remaining 2 cases, involvement of public servants in manipulation of record was not found.
From the report of DM, Azamgarh, it was not clear what happened to those 11 matters filed in the Court of CJM, Azamgarh which did not relate to District Azamgarh. Therefore, DM, Azamgarh shall inform the Commission about the details of aforesaid 11 complaints submitted by Shri Lal Bihari "Mritak" before the CJM, Azamgarh which did not relate to the aforesaid Districts. He shall also inform whether those complaints were forwarded to the authorities having jurisdiction in the matter ."
While considering the reports received from DM, Azamgarh, the Commission, in January 2007 inter alia, observed and directed :
"Looking into the facts and the questions raised in these proceedings, the Commission takes a serious view of the matter. Before proceeding further, it is considered appropriate that the Principal Secretary, Revenue submits a comprehensive report to the Commission on or before 12th March, 2007 covering the following aspects:
I) whether the survey of such cases throughout the State of U.P. was undertaken;
ii) whether public notice was issued so as to cover the entire State of U.P. for information of the affected people to make complaints in similar situation;
iii) whether criminal cases had been launched against the officials/persons found prima facie guilty;
iv) whether disciplinary proceedings were initiated, if so, the status of those criminal cases and the departmental proceedings and;
v) whether the revenue records in all such cases had been corrected and restored."
In response, the Principal Secretary, Revenue Dept UP, submitted a comprehensive report in March 2007".
The Commission vide its proceedings dated 28.3.2007 considered the matter further and observed and directed :
Shri V.K. Sharma, Principal Secretary (Revenue), UP who was present before the Commission stated that 181 other cases have come to light and are being scrutinized. Thus, the total number of cases, including the 181 cases to be scrutinized. 30 cases already had been finalized in District Azamgarh, 11 complaints made by Shri Lal Bihari 'Mritak' in regard to other districts and 81 cases already finalized in other Districts, the total number of cases of manipulation of revenue records by showing 'living landholders' as 'dead' had come to 303.
The Commission suggested that a survey be made of all the cases in which mutation had been made on the basis of death report and such survey should cover the entire period from the date of the order passed by the High Court of Allahabad till today. A list of all such mutation entries shall be made and verified by offices not below the rank of Tehsildar. In cases where the death is found to be suspicious, a proper enquiry should be made by Tehsildar and revenue record shall be accordingly corrected and land restored to the rightful owner.
Shri Sharma agreed that such survey shall be made as desired by the Commission. He also agreed to furnish status report regarding disciplinary action taken against the concerned.
In November 2007, the Principal Secretary, UP, submitted a statement giving details of Action Taken by the State government into the case reported by Lal Behari Mritak. As per the Action Taken Report, a survey was conducted in 42 districts and atleast 175 complaints were received form these districts.
Following this, the State government initiated proceedings against 91 Revenue Officials. Out of this, in 46 cases departmental action was concluded while in 45 cases departmental action was pending. The Action Taken Report, further, said that atleast in 81 cases FIR had been lodged against Revenue Officials or charge sheet had been concluded. It also said atleast in 107 cases FIR had been lodged or charge sheet had been filed against private persons.
Following this, the Commission said the case be listed on 27th February 2008. Principal Secretary (Revenue), Government of UP be asked to submit the compliance report in respect of all the districts of the State at least a week in advance of the date fixed.