MINTU CHAUBEY Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A Vakalatnama filed by Mr. N.D. Shukla and Mr. Rituvendra Singh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 5 is taken on record.

(2.) Heard Mr. Rishi Kant Rai, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Shailesh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. R.C. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. N.D. Shukla, learned counsel for respondent No. 5 and Mr. Mridul Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that one Ram Awadh was the tenure holder of the plot in dispute. Ram Awadh and respondent No. 5 are real brothers. Ram Awadh died issueless on 11/4/2023. Revenue Inspector mutated the name of respondent No. 5 on the basis of Pa. Ka.11 vide order dtd. 18/4/2023. Petitioner applied for mutation under Sec. 34/35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 on the basis of will deed dtd. 17/3/2023 alleged to be executed by Ram Awadh in his favour The mutation case has been registered as case No. 2547 of 2023 (Computerized Case No. T202314291002547). Respondent No. 5 filed his objection on 30/5/2023 in the aforementioned mutation case. Respondent No. 3/Tehsildar vide order dtd. 1/8/2023 stayed the order dtd. 18/4/2023 passed on the basis of Pa. Ka.-11. Respondent No. 5 challenged the order dtd. 1/8/2023 passed by Tehsildar under Sec. 210 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before respondent No. 2/Board of Revenue, U.P. Prayagraj, which was registered as revision No. 2937 of 2023 computerized case No. AL20231429002937. Respondent No. 2 vide order dtd. 9/1/2024 summoned the record of mutation proceeding and stayed the operation of interim order dtd. 1/8/2023 passed by Tehsildar in aforementioned mutation case. Hence, this writ petition on behalf of the petitioner for the following relief: