KARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Devesh Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondents no.1 to 3 and Sri R.S. Mishra, learned counsel for respondents no.4 and 5.

(2.) This writ petition arises out of the proceedings under Sec. 34/35 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901.

(3.) It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that one Dinesh Kumar had moved an application for mutation which was allowed by the Tehsildar on 13/8/2004. Against the said order, the petitioner had moved a revision which was allowed and the matter was remanded back to the Tehsildar. Against the revisional order, a revision was preferred by Dinesh Kumar before the Board of Revenue which was dismissed on 28/5/2007. In the meantime, Dinesh Kumar transferred the land through sale to the contesting private respondents no.4 and 5. Private respondents moved an application for mutation and their application was allowed vide order dtd. 28/3/2011. Against the said order, the revision preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed. Sri Devesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it was the same Officer before whom the matter, after remand in the proceedings by Dinesh Kumar, is pending consideration and he, on the application moved by the private respondents, had allowed the mutation application on 28/3/2011, which he should not have done without dealing with earlier application of the vendor of the private respondent Dinesh Kumar.