ABDULLAH KHAN Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice on behalf of the respondents no. 1 and 2 has been accepted by the Office of the Chief Standing Counsel.

(2.) Under challenge are two orders dtd. 10/12/2021 passed by the respondent no. 2 whereby the initial order of mutation dtd. 7/12/2016 has been recalled. The petitioner being aggrieved against the said order of recall preferred a revision which has also been dismissed by means of an order dtd. 25/1/2022.

(3.) The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner on the basis of the sale-deed dtd. 19/5/1981 had applied for mutation. The said mutation proceedings culminated in the order dtd. 7/12/2016 whereby the name of the petitioner came to be recorded. Thereafter, the private respondent no. 3 moved an application for recall and the said application has been allowed by means of the order dtd. 10/12/2021. The revision against the said order has been dismissed. It is urged that the two authorities have not considered the fact that the application was moved despite the fact that all the conditions as enumerated in the U.P. Revenue Court Manual have been complied with. It is also urged that there was no occasion for recall of the said order and even the entry in the Khatauni which has been made is also not in accordance with the Paragraph 39 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual. It is in the aforesaid backdrop it is submitted that the orders impugned are bad and liable to be set-aside.