Yogi seeks explanation from 14 officials for negligence in revenue cases

Lucknow : Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath has sought explanations from seven Ddivisional Commissioners (DCs) and seven District Magistrates (DMs) regarding negligence and irregularities in handling revenue cases.

The state government is considering strict action against officers who fail to provide satisfactory responses to the notices issued.

Last month, Yogi had ordered a special 60-day campaign to expedite the resolution of pending revenue disputes in various courts across the state.

Additional Chief Secretary (revenue), Sudhir Garg, had said that the progress of this campaign is to be reviewed every Tuesday at the administrative level.

During a review meeting on Tuesday, it was found that seven DCsfrom Varanasi, Saharanpur, Azamgarh, Basti, Chitrakoot Dham, Ayodhya and Aligarh, and seven DMs of Baghpat, Shamli, Muzaffarnagar, Hapur, Chitrakoot, Lalitpur, and Amroha, were negligent in handling both pending and new revenue disputes.

The state government has sought explanations from the erring officers after they were found negligent in resolving pending cases in five divisions, Garg said.

For instance, in Varanasi division, only 82 out of 440 pending revenue cases were disposed.

Similar inadequacies were found in the Saharanpur, Azamgarh, Aligarh and Basti divisions.

In Saharanpur division with four revenue courts, only 54 out of 280 pending cases were resolved, while Azamgarh with five revenue courts, only 126 out of 481 pending cases were disposed.

Moreover, in Aligarh division with three revenue courts, only 83 out of 280 pending cases were resolved, and in Basti division with three revenue courts, only 114 out of 280 pending cases were resolved.

The five bottom-performing divisions in the resolution of new cases were Chitrakoot Dham, Azamgarh, Ayodhya, Saharanpur, and Aligarh.

Notices for negligence in resolving revenue cases have been served to seven DMs.

Garg issued directions to officers for the timely and quality resolution of pending revenue disputes, aligning with standards and targets set by the state government.

On October 31, the state government had sought explanations from 12 DMs and had taken action against negligent Sub-Divisional Magistrates and land consolidation officers in various districts.