RAKESH SHARMA Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Shesh Kumar learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Anupam Kulshreshtra for newly impleaded respondent No. 6 who claims to have succeeded to the holding of respondent No. 5. The respondent No. 5 had died during the pendency of the writ petition.

(2.) THE pedigree giving rise to this dispute has been set out in Paragraph 2 of the writ petition and is gainfully reproduced here under : <IMG>JUDGEMENT_243_ADJ1_2012Image1.jpg</IMG>

(3.) AGGRIEVED the respondent appears to have approached the Board of Revenue in a revision under Section 219 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 and by the impugned order dated 19th February, 2005 the learned Member, Board of Revenue reversed the order of the Additional Commissioner and upheld the order of the appellate authority dated 19th July, 2003. The Board of Revenue proceeded to reiterate the facts that were recorded by the appellate authority.