NIPUN BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT LTD Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner no.1 purchased the land in question by means of a registered sale deed dated 22.11.2006 from Surendra Kumar Mehra, pursuant to which the petitioner no.1 applied for mutation of its name in the revenue record by moving an appropriate application under section 34 of the Land Revenue Act. This application was allowed and the petitioner's name was mutated by an order dated 15.1.2007 passed in case no. 296 of 2007.

(2.) Respondent no.3 Ashok Kumar Beri filed a recall application purported to be one under section 201 of the Land Revenue Act for recall of the order dated 15.1.2007 alleging that the father of Surendra Kumar Mehra, namely, Harbans Lal had executed a sale deed in his favour by means of a sale deed dated 11.7.1977 and that he is in possession. This application was seriously opposed by the petitioner. The Tehsildar, after considering the matter allowed the recall application and recalled its order dated 15.1.2007 directing the parties to place necessary evidence for the purpose of mutation. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the said order, filed a revision under section 219 of the Act which was dismissed with the direction to the Tehsildar to decide the matter after hearing the parties concerned. The petitioner being aggrieved has filed the present writ petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner's name was mutated in the summary proceeding under section 34 of the Act and that a recall application could only be filed under section 201 who are parties to a case. The respondent no.3 being an outsider could not file such an application and consequently the order of the Tehsildar recalling the order and the revisional order are patently erroneous and are liable to be quashed.