INTRODUCTION
Under Land Revenue Act 1967, the review is not an alternative for appeal. The Revenue authorities are empowered to review their orders. The review is a re-consideration of the sanctity of the order passed by the revenue authorities.
RELEVANT PROVISIONS
Section 163 Land Revenue Act 1967.
MEANING OF REVIEW
The term review is the re-examination of judicially or administratively or reconsideration
AUTHORITY WHO CAN REVIEW
Following authorities can receive the order.
- Executive district officer revenue [Commissioner]
- Collector
- Assistant Collector
MODES OF REVIEW
The Land Revenue Act, 1967 has vested the power to review in Commissioner, collector, or assistant collector and not the revenue court. There are following modes of making a review
1. At his Own Motion (Suo Moto):
The revenue officer has the power conferred to review on grounds of their own motion, sup moto without any application This is the discretionary authority of the revenue officer.
2. Review of the Application:
The other mode which has been provided is on the application of the party. Any aggrieved party can give an application to the commissioner, collector, and assistant collector for the review of the case decided by him or any of his predecessors.
POWER OF COMMISSIONER IN RESPECT OF REVIEW
The Land Revenue Act, of 1967 has given the authority to the commissioner, collector, or assistant collector to review the matter, and in so reviewing the matter he can do any of the following acts:
- Modify the decision
- Reverse the decision
- Confirm the decision
OBLIGATIONS REGARDING REVIEW
The revenue officer will have to fulfill some obligations. Some of the obligations which he has to take into consideration are as follows.
Review by Commissioner or by Collector:
Collectors and commissioners have the power even to review those orders which are not passed by them but by officers’ subordinates to them when they think it is necessary for the sake of justice.
Review by Subordinate Officer:
Revenue officers of grade 2 or subordinate to the commissioner or collector can review the orders passed by themselves or their subordinates.
Sanction of Senior Officer:
In all the above-mentioned cases, the officer should first obtain the sanction of the revenue officer to whose control he is immediately subject to authority.
LIMITATION PERIOD FOR THE APPLICATION
An application for the review of an order shall not be entertained unless it is made within ninety days from the passing of the order.
Sufficient Cause for Delay:
If the applicant satisfies to revenue officer that he has sufficient cause for not making the application then the revenue officer may allow him to apply within the limitation period.
Notice:
An order shall not be modified or reversed unless reasonable notice has been given to the parties interested.
The opportunity of being Heard:
An order shall not be modified or reversed unless the parties interested are given the parties an opportunity of being heard.
Review of order in Appeal:
An order against which an appeal has been preferred should not be reviewed.
Confirmation of appeal of Order:
An appeal shall not lie from an order which has been refused in review or has been confirmed in review by the revenue officer.
Confirmation of review of the order by Higher Authority:
Where an order passed by the commissioner has been confirmed by the Board of Revenue then the successor in the officer of the collector shall not be impotent to review that order of his predecessor which was confirmed by higher authority.
NON-APPLICATION OF LAW OF LIMITATION
The law of limitation is not applicable to the provisions of review.
SCOPE
The section has its application only to the revenue officer and not to the revenue courts It applies only when a revenue officer does not action as a revenue officer wishes to modify or reverse any order either passed by him or another who was also not working under the capacity of a revenue officer.
CASES WHEN REVIEW IS ALLOWED
Following are the cases when the review is allowed.
New Evidence:
On the discovery of new evidence, review can be filed.
Mistake of Fact:
It is allowed on the account of a mistake of fact on the face of the record.
No Opportunity to Respondent:
Review is allowed when an order is passed in appeal without giving an opportunity to the respondent to defend his case.
Active Fraud:
Review is allowed when some active fraud has taken place.
Misrepresentation:
Misrepresentation of the case is also grounds to review the order passed by the revenue authorities.
Change in Law:
Review is allowed in a case where some change in law has taken place in the intervening period.
No Acquiescence:
Where there is no acquiescence on the part of the petitioner, the review is allowed.
Review in cases of Lambardar:
Where the Lambardar appointed in a patti owns no property their review is allowed.
Any other Sufficient Ground:
Review is allowed in a case where there is any other sufficient ground.
CASES WHERE REVIEW IS NOT ALLOWED
Following are those cases where review is not allowed.
- Ignorance of provisions of law
- Non-application of law
- Mis-interpretation of law
- Mis-application of law
- Disputed facts
- Where there is a need to conduct an inquiry
- Against the sanction of review
CONCLUSION
It is concluded that all classes of revenue authorities are competent to review their orders under the Land Revenue Act 1967 on the application of an aggrieved person. Review can only be entertained when new and important grounds are advanced which cannot be produced at the time of hearing at an earlier stage or there was an error apparent on the face of the record.
FAQs
Define the term ‘Review’. Discuss the legal provisions relating to review under the provisions of the Land Revenue Act, 1967.
(2019-A)
Discuss the law relating to Review under the provisions of the Land Revenue Act, 1967.
(2016-A, 2013-A, 2010-A)
Define the term review. Discuss the law relating to ‘Review’ under the provisions of the land revenue Act, 1967.
(2015-A)
Write a detailed note on appeals, Review and Revision, and the Land Revenue Act with particular reference to the period of limitation prescribed for each of them under the law.
(2012-S)
