(1.) Heard Sri M.N.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents No.1 and 2. No one has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.3 even in the revised call.
(2.) This writ petition arises out of proceedings under Sec. 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901.
(3.) Learned Standing Counsel at the very outset submitted that as the matter arises out of mutation proceedings, writ petition is not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution and remedy available is of filing regular suit. Reliance has been placed upon decision of coordinate bench of this Court in Mathura vs. State of U.P. and others, 2012 (4) AWC 3825 and recent decision of Apex Court in the case of Jitendra Singh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors., Special Leave Petition (C) No.13146 of 2021 decided on 6/9/2021.